arta 2019 - achemenet · 2019-05-27 · arta 2019.003 achemenet mai 2019 1 annalisa azzoni -...

Arta 2019.003

Achemenet Mai 2019 1

Annalisa Azzoni - Vanderbilt University

Christina Chandler - Bryn Mawr College

Erin Daly - University of Iowa

Mark B. Garrison - Trinity University

Jan Johnson - Oriental Institute, University of Chicago

Brian Muhs - Oriental Institute, University of Chicago1

From The Persepolis Fortification Archive Project, 7 A Demotic Tablet or Two in the Persepolis Fortification Archive

Abstract

This article publishes two tablets in the Persepolis Fortification archive, one of which

is certainly inscribed in Demotic, and possibly the other as well. They join a small number

of tablets written in Old Persian, Neo-Babylonian, Greek, and Phrygian, alongside the vast

majority of tablets written in Elamite or Aramaic or left uninscribed.2

Keywords

Persepolis Tablets, Demotic, Egypt, Seals

1 Annalisa Azzoni, Janet Johnson, and Brian Muhs are responsible for "Part 1: the texts," and Christina

Chandler, Erin Daly, and Mark B. Garrison for "Part 2: the seals".

2 ThePersepolisFortificationArchiveProjectoftheOrientalInstitute,UniversityofChicagohasreceived

supportfromtheAndrewW.MellonFoundation,theFarhangFoundation,theGettyFoundation,the

IranHeritageFoundation,theNationalEndowmentfortheHumanities,theNationalGeographicSociety

CommitteeforResearchandExploration,thePARSACommunityFoundation,theRoshanCulturalHeritage

Institute,theUniversityofChicagoWomen’sBoard,andotherdonorsandorganizations.Thanksaredue

theentireteamofthePersepolisFortificationArchiveProject.

www.achemenet.com/pdf/arta/2019.003-Azzoni.pdf



Part 1: the texts

ErnstHerzfeld’sexcavationconductedin1933onbehalfoftheOrientalInstituteof

theUniversityofChicagoonthenortheasterncorneroftheterraceoftheAchaemenid

capitalPersepolisunearthedthousandsofsealedclaytabletsinchambersinthe

fortificationwall.Theremarkablediscoverywaslaterrecognizedtobetheremnants

ofacomplexadministrativearchiveofthePersianEmpire,recordingthestorageand

disbursementofcommoditiesmostlyinthePārsaregionanddatedtotheregnalyears

13-28ofDariusI(509-493BCE).3Todate,thePersepolisFortificationarchivecounts

about20,000to25,000tabletsandfragments,themajorityofwhich,comprisingcirca

70percentofthearchive,arewrittenincuneiformElamite(Azzoniet al.2017).Afew

thousand,constitutingcirca20percentofthearchive,areuninscribedbutsealed

(Azzoniet al.2017;Garrison2008).Asmallgroup,amountingtoonlycirca5percent

ofthearchive,consistsoftabletswritteninAramaicscriptandlanguage(Azzoniet

al.2017).

ThePersepolisFortificationAramaictablets(PFAT)aremostlywritteninink,

butmanyarealsoincised,andsomewerewrittenininkwhiletheclaywasstillwet;

inthelastcase,thestylussometimesleftintheclaytabletmarksstillclearlyvisible

evenwhentheinkhasmostlyfaded(Azzoni2008:256-257).Acoupleoftabletswere

originallyassignedtothesmallAramaiccorpus,simplybasedonthefactthatthey

werewritteninink.Uponcloserinspection,oneofthem,Fort.2131-401(originally

numberedPFAT671),revealedthatthewritingwasnotAramaicbutratherDemotic

scriptandlanguage.4Thisunexpecteddiscoveryledalsotothereviewofanother

tablet,Fort.0839-401(originallynumberedPFAT000),thatcarriedonlyoneinked

symbolwhichdidnotappeartobeAramaicatthetimeofcataloging(hencethe

numberPFAT000).InlightofFort.2131-401clearlycarryinginkedDemotic,itisnow

possibletosuggestthatFort.0839-401maybewritteninDemoticaswell.

3 AlthoughexcavationsatPersepolis,conductedin1934and1938byEricSchmidtonbehalfoftheOriental

Institute,alsouncoveredanothersmalleradministrativearchive,thePersepolisTreasuryarchive(PTA),

thisarticlewillconcernonlythetabletsandsealimpressionsfromthePersepolisFortificationarchive.

For information about the PTA, see Azzoni et al.2017.

4 Foranannouncementofthediscovery,seeStolper2017:155.



“People of many tongues”

WhilethetwoDemotictabletsarecertainlyuniqueintheirkindanddonotappear

tohaveanyparallelstodate,theycanbeaddedtoasmallcorpusofotherunica attested

intheFortificationarchive.Ithaslongbeenknownthatthearchivehasyielded

oneincisedtablet(Fort.1771)writteninGreekscriptandlanguage(Hallock1969:2;

Balcer1979;Schmitt1989:303-304;Tavernier2008:63;Rougemont2012:121-2),one

cuneiformtablet(Fort.11786)inNeo-Babylonianlanguage,5andonetablet(A 29797)

inPhrygianlanguageandscript(Brixhe2004);6anothercuneiformtablet(Fort.1208-

101)wasrecentlyidentifiedaswritteninOldPersianlanguage(StolperandTavernier

2007);andfinally,onetablet(PF-NN2334A)iswritteninanunidentifiedlanguage

(StolperandTavernier2007).Asimilarvariationinlanguagesisalsoattestedin

theinscribedseals,wherewefindElamiteandAramaic,asexpected,butalsoOld

Persian(onlyintrilingualinscriptions),Babylonian,Greek,andhieroglyphicEgyptian

(GarrisonandRitner2010:34).

Thepresenceofdifferentlanguagesandscriptsintheadministrativearchiveof

theAchaemenidcapitalhasbeenvariouslydiscussedelsewhere(e.g.Tavernier2008;

GarrisonandRitner2010;Henkelman2017a).Themultilingualismreflectedinthe

archiveseemstobealignedwiththestatedvisionoftheAchaemenidrulers,known

throughtheirroyalinscriptions,andisreflectedbythedocumentedpresenceofa

varietyofdifferentpeoplefromthevariouspartsoftheempirecoexistinginthe

imperialheartland.Atleastthirtydifferentethnonymsareattestedinthearchive

(Henkelman2017a:273),anditisthereforenotsurprisingtofinddifferentlanguages

attestedatPersepolis.However,thefactthatwehaveonlyonetabletofeachdifferent

language,perhapsonlywiththeexceptionofDemotic,remainspuzzling,andone

cannotsimplyconceivethattheunicawerewrittenbyforeignersusingtheirnative

language.

TheGreektext,forexample,isqualitativelysimilarincontentandterseness

totextsfoundintheAramaiccorpus.Ithasonlyfourwordsandonenumber.

Twowords(οἶνος, “wine,” and δυο “two,”alsoreiteratedbythepresenceoftwo

numeralstrokes)areGreek.Themonthname(τεβητ)isaGreek transliteration of

5 WhilethetabletwasfoundatPersepolis,itisalegal,ratherthanadministrative,documentandisextra-

neoustotherestofthearchive.SeeStolper1984:304.

6 Thetextcannotbereadwithanycertainty;itisthusdifficulttodeterminehowthisdocumentrelatesto

thearchive,thoughitappearstobeeconomicinnatureandcontainsanOldPersianmonthname.See

StolperandTavernier2007:4;Tavernier2008:63.



the Babylonian month name Tebētu.LiketheAramaiccorpus,theGreektextthus

followstheBabyloniancalendar(ratherthantheOldPersian).Lastly,theunitof

measurementisatransliterationofthewell-knownPersianword*mari –(Schmitt

1989:33-34;Tavernier2007:449),alsoattestedintheElamiteandAramaictabletsin

thePersepolisFortificationArchive.

Completefluencyinthelanguageornativelevelofknowledgewerenotrequired

forthewriteroftheGreektext,butheprobablyexpectedthatthepersonreceivingit

wouldhavebeenabletoreadthisdocument(Tavernier2008:63).Asimilarsituation

appearstohavebeenthecaseintheAramaiccorpus,wherethewriters’knowledge

ofthelanguagewasflawed(Azzoni2017:460-461),andtheirspellingofIranianwords

andnamesoftendisplaysclearinterferenceofElamitespelling,possiblysuggesting

abetterfamiliaritywiththatlanguage(AzzoniandTavernier,forthcoming).While

atPersepolisthescribeswritinginAramaiconparchmentwereprobablybilingual

orevenmultilingual,thequestionremainsopenregardingthescribesofcuneiform

(Tavernier2008:64).Theformer,calledteppir(probablyatranslationofBabylonian

sēpiru),wereprobablyveryfluentinAramaic,butunfortunatelytheparchment

evidencehasbeenlost(Tavernier2008:264).Whenthesescribesarenamed,the

namesareIranian,notsurprisingly(Tavernier2008:64).Theindividualswhowrote

AramaiconclaytabletswerenotnecessarilythesameastheoneswhowroteAramaic

onparchment;oneassumesthatformer’sknowledgeofAramaicdidnothavetobe

asfluentasthelatter’s.ItislikelythatthefluencyofwritersoftheDemotictablet(s)

wassimilartothefluencyofthewritersofAramaiconclaytabletsandthewriterof

the one Greek text.

Egyptian language and Egyptians in Persepolis

Asmentionedearlier,thenewlyfoundDemotictabletsarenottheonlyevidence

ofEgyptianlanguageatPersepolis.Infact,Egyptianwritingandiconographyhave

beenidentifiedonsealspreservedasimpressionsontabletsfromtheFortification

archive.Twoseals(PFS0284*andPFS1434s)onElamitetabletspublishedbyRichard

T.Hallock(Hallock1969)displayEgyptianizingiconography,oneofthem(PFS0284*)

carryingaGreeklegend(GarrisonandRitner2010:5-6).Whileresearchingamongthe

yetunpublishedtabletsoftheFortificationarchive,MarkB.Garrisonidentified“no

fewerthansixsealscarryingEgyptianhieroglyphicinscriptions,andonethatmay

usehieroglyphicsignsinadecorativemanner”(GarrisonandRitner2010:7).



Likewise,thepresenceofEgyptiansinPersepolisisknownfromavarietyof

documentsmentioningEgyptianskilleddependentworkers,suchasgoldsmiths,

wood-carvers,andpainters(Henkelman2017a:274).Remarkably,accordingto

WouterF.M.Henkelman,“Egyptian”istheonlyethnonymassociatedwithpeople

workingwithgold,wheneverthatdistinctionispresent(ibid.).Asforwood-carvers,

theyareattestedinthePersepolisTreasuryarchive.7Theyappeartobespecialists

fromEgypt,andthepresenceofa“centurion,”presumablyattheheadofahundred

ofthem,pointstothelikelihoodofaninternalhierarchy(ibid.276).Thisinstitutional

arrangementmayfindaparallelwiththenotedpresenceofa“scribeoftheEgyptians”

atSusa,whoapparentlyhadanEgyptianpersonalname,Harkipi(Tavernier2008:

64;Henkelman2017a:276;Henkelman2017b:120-121).Finally,theterminology

“Egyptianpainters”inthePersepolistabletsmaynotrefertopaintersingeneralbut

tocraftsmenworkingwithglazes,8or,inEgyptiancontext,faience.OtherEgyptian

skilledworkersincludedstonemasons,brewers,andotherswhoseprofessionis

difficulttoidentify(Henkelman2017a:274-97).Finally,Egyptianducksarerecorded

inthearchiveinanimalinventoriesandreceiptsoffodder(ibid. 297-8).

The demotic tablets

Fort. 2131-401

Thesmalltablet(29mmlength;25mmwidth;12mmthickness)issimilarinshape

tomanyoftheAramaicanduninscribedtablets.Itistongue-shaped,moldedover

aknottedstring,theholesofwhicharebarelyvisibleontheflatedge.Thepattern

ofthewriting,intwolinesontheobverseonthelongaxisfromtheflatedgetothe

roundedge,issimilartooneofthemostcommonpatternsintheAramaiccorpus.

WhilethetabletswritteninAramaicsharesimilarshapeswithsomeofthetablets

writteninElamite,thetextworksinadifferentmanner.Wheretheflatedgewould

alwaysbeontheleftintheElamitetablets(hencethenomenclatureleftedgein

publicationsoftextsandsealsoccurringontheElamitetablets),theAramaic,written

fromrighttoleftinthemajorityofinstanceswhenwrittenonthelongaxis,will

7 Seeabove,note3.

8 AccordingtoHenkelman(2017a:278),thecontextintheSusaChartersuggeststhepossibilitythatthey

mighthavebeen“specializedinproducingandplacingvitreousmaterials.”



keeptheflatedgeontheright.ThepresentDemotictabletappearstofollowthis

expectation.

Fort.2131-401resemblestheAramaicmonolingualtabletsnotonly inthe

orientationofthetextbutalsointhetersenessofthetext.Asthistextcontainsonly

twolines,itisinfactquitesimilartomanyAramaictexts,whichoftendisplayoneor

afewwords,andnevermorethantwelvelines.Theyarecharacterizedbythelackof

(whattousseemstobe)essentialinformationandwereunlikelyusedasprimaryor

independentrecords(Azzoni2017:256).Asmentionedbefore,thesingleGreektext

intheFortificationarchivealsoappearstoconformtothispattern.

Transliteration and Translation 1) nꜢ hr.w theyouths/servants

2) pgṱ ¼ ¼(unit)ofpgṱ

Commentary1)nꜢ hr.w,‘theyouths/servants’:

-TheinitialsigncouldbethefemininesingulararticletꜢorthepluralarticlenꜢ. Thepluralarticleisfavoredbecausethelongverticalsignattheendoftheword

appears to be the plural marker.

-Thefirstsignafterthedefinitearticleappearstobeanhalthoughtheexpectedloopisrathersmallandthedownstrokemustbereconstructed.

-Thethirdsignafterthedefinitearticleappearstobeachilddeterminative,

whichsupportsthereadingẖr,‘youth/servant’.Thebaseofthesignseemstoobroad

to read Ꜣ,preventingthewordfrombeingreadḫrꜢ,‘rations’.-InsupportofthereadingnꜢ hr.w‘theyouths/servants’isthefactthatthiscould

correspondtotermsfoundinbothElamiteandAramaictextsintheFortification

archive.TheElamitepuhu (Hallock1969:93-94;Henkelman2008:206)anditsAramaic

counterpartʿlym(y)n(Azzoni2008:261),similarlyusedtoidentify“boys,servants,”

arewidelyattestedintheFortificationarchive.

2)pgṱ ¼, ‘¼(unit)ofpgṱ’: -Thefirsttwosignsofthewordareclearlyp and g.Thethirdsignthatisreadṱ

mightalsobeanrplusdiagonalstroke,buttheligatureandslightlywiderfollowing

spacesuggestthatbothelementsbelongtogether.Thefourthsignistentativelyread

asapotdeterminative,buttheresultingwordpgṱisunattested.Itwouldbeintriguing

toproposeanIranian*Baga-nameinthissecondline,asthatwouldmakesensefrom

theperspectiveofwhatwewouldlikelyexpectinatextfromtheFortificationarchive



andgiventhataDemoticrenderingofthetheophoric*baga- as pg is possibly attested

intheDemoticpgprnyfor*Bagafarnaya-(Tavernier2007:134),butthetentative

readingofthefinalsignasapotdeterminative,andofthefollowingsignasanumber,

arguesagainstreadingpgṱ as a personal name.

-Thefinalsigninthelineistentativelyread¼,presumablyindicatingthequantity

of pgṱ.Itcouldalsoberead100,butthelongtailslopesdownwardmorethanisusual

for100.Theuncertaintyaboutthemeaningofpgṱaddstotheuncertaintyaboutthereadingofthefinalsign.Itdoesnotseempossible,however,totakeitasaforeign

nameorananimaldeterminativegoverningtheentireline.

Fort. 0839-401Largerthantheprevioustablet(34mmlength;31mmwidth;12mmthickness),

Fort.0839-401isalsoatongueshapedtabletandclearlyshowstwostringholeson

theflatedge.Thetabletcontainsonlyonegraphicelement,whichcouldbereadas

aligatureoftwoDemoticsigns,forexampleir=w,‘(it/them)were/is/aredone.’Itis

unclearwhatsuchareadingwouldmean,however,whichmakesitspeculativeand

doubtfulthatthetextshouldbereadasDemotic.

SummaryTheoneorpossiblytwoDemotictabletsintheFortificationarchiveareextremely

terse.Amongthethousandsoftextsinthearchive,theyclearlyareexceptional.

Nonetheless,theydocontributetothepreviouslyattestedevidenceofEgyptian

languageatPersepolis,andtheydocumentacommunitywheresomeindividualswere

familiarwiththeEgyptianlanguageandscripts;perhapssomeoftheseindividuals

wereevenliterateinEgyptianandatleastpartiallyintegratedintotheadministration

of the site.



Part 2: the seals

SealsandsealingwerecriticalpartsoftheadministrativeapparatusatPersepolis.

Forall typesofdocumentation in theFortificationarchive, sealsprovidean

additionallayerofadministrativecoding;indeed,inmanycasesitisonlythroughthe

applicationofsealsthatweareabletoclarifybothindividualtextsandoverarching

administrativeprocedures.9

Fort. 2131-401Thetabletcarriesoneseal,PFUTS0250,appliedtothereverse(Figs.5-6).10

OwingtotherarityofaDemoticdocumentwithinthearchive,itisdifficultto

knowwhethernormalsealingprotocolsareapplicable.AmongtheElamite,Aramaic,

anduninscribeddocuments,therearefourtypesofsealingprotocol:single-seal;

counter-seal(twoseals,onesealonlyontheleftedge,theotheronanysurface

otherthantheleftedgebutmostcommonlythereverse);parallel-seal(twoseals,

butnotfollowingthecounter-sealprotocol);multipleseal(three-sixsealsapplied

toatablet).11

ThesinglesealappliedtoonesurfaceonFort.2131-401wouldthusfallintowhat

wecallthesingle-sealprotocol.Inmanycases,thesingle-sealprotocolsignalsan

officialofhighadministrativeauthority,butweareabletomakethatinferenceonly

witharobustsetofapplicationsofanyparticularseal.12Fortunately,PFUTS0250

occursalsoontwouninscribeddocuments,PFUT0155-201(Figs.7-9)andPFUT0167-

205(Fig.10).Inbothcases,itisinthesingle-sealprotocol;onPFUT0167-205,the

sealisappliedtotheobverse;onPFUT0155-201,itisappliedtotheobverse,reverse,

upper,bottom,andrightedges.Theleftedgeofthistabletisdestroyed;mostlikely

thesealinfactcoveredallsixsurfacesofthetablet.

9 SealsandsealingwithintheFortificationarchivehavebeenaddressedinnumerouspublications;seemost

recentlytheoverview,withbibliography,inAzzoniet al. 2017;Garrison2017:15-116.Withtheexceptionof

Figs.6and23,allcollateddrawingsofthesealsfromthePersepolisFortificationarchivearebyGarrison.

ThephotographswereproducedundertheauspicesofthePFAProject.WethankPFAProjectdirector

MatthewW.Stolperforpermissiontopublishthephotographs.

10 ForglypticsiglawithinthePersepolitanarchives,seeGarrison2017:xiiand30-32.

11 Garrison2017:52-67.

12 Seealsothecommentsbelow;forthesingle-sealprotocolinparticular,seeGarrison2017:53-55.



Giventhatinallthreeinstances,Fort.2131-401,PFUT0155-201,andPFUT0167-

205,PFUTS0250isappliedinthesingle-sealprotocol,andgiventhatinoneinstance,

PFUT0155-201,thesealcoversallsixsurfacesofthetablet,wesuspectthattheuserof

PFUTS0250wasofsomeconsiderableadministrativeauthority.13Thestrikingvisual

qualitiesofthesealimagerysuggestthesame.

PFUTS0250(Fig.6)isaremarkableglypticartifact,atestamenttothevibrantand

creativevisualenvironmentatPersepolisintheearlyyearsofthereignofDarius.The

sceneisalionhuntfromachariot.Thechariot,inwhichtwofiguresride,ispulledto

theleftbyateamoffouranimals(mostlikelylions).Thefigure(topofhisheadnot

preserved)inthefrontofthecartfacestotheleft;hisbodyappearstobedepictedin

profile.Heholdshisarmsstraightandextendsthemdownwarddiagonallytograsp

asetofreins(fourinnumber).Hisgarmentcannotbedetermined.Hehasathick

squarebeardthatrestsonhischest.Thefigure(topofhisheadnotpreserved)in

thebackofthecartfacestotheright.Heholdshisonearmstraightandextendsit

upwarddiagonallytograspthepawofarampantlion.Heholdshisotherarmbent

andextendsitupwardbehindhishead,thehandgraspingaspearthathedrivesinto

thechestoftherampantlion.Hisgarmentcannotbedetermined.Hehasathick

pointedbeardthatrestsoverhischest;aroundedcoiffureisatthebackofhisneck.

Thecartisrectangularinshapeandcarriescross-hatchingonitsside,perhaps

adecorativepatterningortoindicatewicker.Ayoke-polerunsfromthefrontlower

cornerofthecarttothebackoftheshoulderofthefirstdraftanimal.Thereinsthat

thedriverholdsarefourinnumber;theyrunfromhishandsdownwardtotheback

oftheneckofthefirstanimal.Theaxleandeightspokesofthewheelareindicated;

ontheouterrimofthewheelattheendofeachspokeisanub.Theanimalsare

arrangedoneontopoftheother,eachoffsettotheleft.Theyholdtheirforelegs

13 Itisrareforasealtobeappliedtomorethantwosurfacesofatablet;almostalways,sealsthatoccuron

morethantwosurfacesofatabletbelongtohigh-rankusers.Theonlysealthatconsistentlyisappliedto

allsixsurfacesofatabletisPFUTS0018*,asealthatcarriesaroyal-nameinscriptionofDarius(Garrison

2014a:75-76,figs.7.9–18).ItisalmostuniversallythecaseintheFortificationarchivethatindividualsof

highrankand/orstatus(e.g.,theroyalwomenIrtašdunaandIrdabama,thedirectoranddeputy-director

oftheagency,ParnakkaandZiššawiš)useonlythesingle-sealprotocol.AsHallock(1977:127-29)noted,in

thosecaseswemayassumethatacountersealwasunnecessaryduetothehighauthorityoftheindividual.

So,too,lettersandletter-orders,representingadministrativeactivityataveryhighlevel,employ,with

onlyrareexceptions,thesingle-sealprotocol,thesealalwaysrepresentingtheaddressoroftheletter

(Garrison2017:53-55).



straightandextendthemoutwardtogetherasifinfullrun.Thehindlegsofonlythe

firsttwoanimalsfromrightarepreserved,extendingbackwardtogether.Atailis

preservedononlythefirstanimalfromright,extendingdownwarddiagonally(tip

notpreserved).Themuzzlesoftheanimalsarenotwellpreserved;theycouldbe

leonineorcaprid;bothareattestedasdraftanimalsinotherchariotscenesfromthe

archive.Ourinclinationistoidentifythemaslions.Ashorttriangular-shapedear

emergesfromthetopofeachanimal’shead.

Arampantlionisbehindthecart,facingtotheleft.Itraisesonehindlegto

placethepawonthelowerbackcornerofthecart.Itholdsoneforelegstraightand

extendsitdownwardtoplacethepawontheupperbackcornerofthecart.Itholds

theotherforelegstraightandraisesitupwarddiagonallytowardthefigureinthe

backofthecart.Theclawsareindicatedbydrillmarks(lowerforeleg)ortriangular

elements(upperforeleg).Ashorttailcurlsupwardwithtuftedtermination.Themane

isindicatedbyaserratededgealongthebackofitsneck.Themouthisopen.

Theedgeofthesealispreservedatthetopofthedesign.

Thecarvingisarobustmodeledstyle.Thedeepcarvingandbroadformsareseen

especiallyinthefigureinthebackofthecartandtherampantlion.Wewouldclassify

thecarvingasonestrainoftherichlyvariedPersepolitanModeledStyle.

ThesealislargebyPersepolitanstandards:thelengthofthedesignis3.80

cm(yieldingadiameterfortheoriginalsealmatrixof1.20cm);theheightofthe

preserveddesignis2.10cm.14

Inthisvenue,weareunabletoprovideanexhaustiveanalysisofeitherchariot

scenesinPersepolitanglypticortheimageryonPFUTS0250.Ingeneral,wemay

notethatchariotscenesareverycommoninPersepolitanglyptic,numberingtodate

almostninetyexamples.Therearetwoprincipaltypesofscenes,oneinwhichthere

isonlyonefigureinthecart(e.g.,PFS0591,figs.11-12),anotherinwhichthereare

twofigures,adriverandanindividualwhoengagesinsomemannerwithananimal/

creaturebehindthecart(e.g.,PFS0308,figs.13-14).Therearesomenoteworthy

featuresofthesechariotscenes.Firstly,innoexampledoesanindividualuseabow

andarrowfromachariot,asonthefamousLondonDariuscylinder.15Secondly,in

14 Cf.thesizeofsealspublishedinGarrisonandRoot(2001:471-83),wheresealswithaheightofmorethan

2.00cmandadiameterofmorethan1.20cmareveryrare.

15 Onthisseal,seeGarrison2014a:82-84,fig.7.25.TheoneexceptionmaybePFUTS0603;althoughpoorly

preserved,thesealappearstobeacopy,orperhapsevenanimpression,oftheLondonDariuscylinder

(Garrison2014a:90,figs.7.28–29).



noscenearethedraftanimalshorsesorequids;rather,themenagerieincludeslions,

bulls,caprids,andvarioustypesofleoninecreatures.16Thirdly,inmanyscenes,such

asthatonPFUTS0250,theindividualinthebackofthecartgraspstherampant

animal/creature,producingadesignthatcombinesa“hunt”fromachariotwitha

heroicencounter.Fourthly,court-centriciconography(e.g.,thewingeddisk,Persian

courtrobe,dentatecrown,palmtree)isalmostcompletelyabsentinchariotscenes.

Fifthly,asfaraswecandetermine,nochariotsceneisrenderedintheCourtStyle,

thecarvingstylethatmostdirectlyandconsistentlyevokesimperialrhetoricat

Persepolis.

PFUTS0250standsoutamongthecorpusofchariotscenesatPersepolisowingto

itsdepictionoffourdraftanimals;inalmosteveryothercase,onlyonedraftanimalis

indicated.Thearrangementoftheanimals,partiallyoverlapping,stackedoneabove

theother,andsteppedforwardinacascadingmotion,strikesavirtuosicchord.There

isnothingevencloselycomparableinPersepolitanglyptic;wecanfindnothingthat

issimilarinthepreviousglypticrecordofElam,Babylonia,orAssyria.So,too,oneis

hard-pressedtofindcomparandainlaterAchaemenidglyptic.17

16 PFUTS0603mayagainbeanexception(seepreviousnote).

17 TheLondonDariuscylinderdepictstwodraftanimals.Concerningtheglypticevidencefordepictionof

chariotsinAssyriaandBabylonia,seeCollon2001:59-60;forroyalchariotsinmonumentalreliefinNew

KingdomEgyptandAssyriainthefirstmillenniumBCE,seeSacco2013.Sacco(2013:210-11)notesthat

twohorsesarealmostuniversallydepictedinbothEgyptandAssyria,withafewexceptions(threehorses)

inmonumentalreliefdatingtoAššurbanipalandSargonII;forthepossibilityofthree-andfour-horse

chariotsinUrartu,seeGökce,Işik,andDeğirmencioğlu2013:116.LittauerandCrouwel(1979:113-16)

believedthatthequadrigaexistedinAssyriabaseduponthenumberofreignsdepicted(nothorses).Three

dimensionalmodelsofchariots(asdistinctfromrepresentationsonsealsandmonumentalrelief)indicate

thatthequadrigaexistedalreadyintheearly1stmillenniumBCE(LittauerandCrouwel1979:113-16,147,

150).Thesecondmost-commonlydepictedelementinthefamousAchaemenid-eracoinageofSidonisa

chariot.ElayiandElayi(2004:493-531)provideanexhaustivesurveyofchariotsandthescenesinwhich

theyoccuronSidoniancoinage.Theyindicatethatthechariotappearsonlyincoinagedatingtotheir

GroupsII-IV(ca.430-333BCE).Therearesomedifficultiesindeterminingtheexactnumberofhorsesthat

arerendered,thenumberofreins,horseheads,andlegsoftennotcorresponding.Theauthorssuggest

thatoncoinsfromGroupIIandIII,theintentionwastodepictthreehorses;onthoseofGroupIV,four

horses.Thefour-horsechariotthusappearsonlyintheirlastgroup,GroupIV,datingca.401-333BCE.In

boththethree-andfour-horsechariotsonthesecoins,thehorsesarestackedonedirectlyovertheother

(asinAssyrianmonumentalrelief),verydifferentfromthestackedandsteppedmodeseenonPFUTS0250.



ChariotscenessuchasthatonPFUTS0250,whereinanindividualinthebackof

thecartgrappleswithand/orspearsarampantlion,vividlyrecallselectimagery

onAssyrianmonumentalreliefandglyptic.18Perhapsmoststrikinginthisregard

arethefamouslion-huntreliefsofAššurbanipalfromhisNorthPalaceatNineveh.

PFUTS0250shareswithseveralofthosereliefsthethemeoflionhuntfromachariot

(driverandhunter[s]),theuseofaspear,andthephysicalconfrontationbetween

hunterandhunted.ParticularlynoteworthyisanextendedpassagefromRoomC

(slabs20-28)inwhichtherearetwoscenesofAššurbanipalandattendantsfighting

lionsfromachariot.19Intheone(slabs20-21),arampantlionhasclimbedontothe

backofthechariotcart(Fig.15);Aššurbanipalstabsthelioninthethroatwithashort

swordordagger,whiletwoattendantsthrustspearsintoitsthroat.Intheother(slabs

23-25),thelionhaspouncedontothewheelofthechariotandisbitingdownonit

(Fig.16);Aššurbanipalandanattendantspearthelioninthetopofitshead.Theclose

proximityofthekingandrampantliononslabs20-21(Fig.15)evokesthedynamicof

anotherimportantvisualtropeofAssyrianroyalimagery,theAssyriankingacting

inthetraditionalroleoftheherowhograppleswithlions.Twoextendedandvivid

scenesofthekingkillinglions,laidoutinthreeregisters,occurinthereliefsfrom

theNorthPalaceatNineveh:slabs6-16inRoomS;slabsA-EinRoomS1.20Inone

vignetteinRoomS(slab13),theking,standing,graspsarampantlionbythethroat

whileplungingaswordinitschest;inanotherinRoomS1(slabC),thekinggrasps

arampantlionbythetopofitsheadanddrivesaspearintoitschest.Lastly,the

variousiterationsoftheso-calledAssyrianroyal-sealtypealsodepictthekinginthe

traditionalposeoftheherokillinglions.21

AddingtothespectacleofPFUTS0250(andunderliningitsAssyrianheritage)is

thesenseofmovementconveyedbytheyokedleoninedraftanimals–themselves

conqueredcreaturesofthedominanthunterinthechariot.Thelegsofthecreatures

areoutstretchedindicatingafullgallop.Theynearlycatchtherepeatedheroandlion

asthesealiscontinuouslyrolledout.Theemphaticmotionandepisodicqualityofthe

18 OneofthedistinguishingfeaturesofmanysealsexecutedintheModeledStyleatPersepolisisadeep

resonancewithAssyrianart,bothmonumentalandglyptic(seee.g.,Garrison2002,2011,2014b).

19 Barnett1976,pls.10-12,andA.

20 Barnett1976:pls.46-53,forthereliefsinRoomS,pls.56-59,forthereliefsinRoomS1.

21 Radner2008andMitchellandSearight2008:pp.97-102,294-95,nos.212-220,forexamplesoftheAssyrian

royal-sealtype.Garrison(2010b:158-63)exploressomeoftheinterlockingvisualdynamicsofthelion-

huntscenesfromtheNorthPalaceofAššurbanipalandtheAssyrianroyal-sealtype.



sceneinextendedrollingalsovividlyrecallthecontinuousnarrativestyleassociated

withselectNeo-Assyrianreliefs(as,e.g.,onslabs20-28inRoomC).22

Thebroadanddeeplycarvedformsofthefigureinthebackofthechariotandthe

rampantliononPFUTS0250evokethemodelinginlateAssyrianmonumentalrelief

(Figs.15-16).AtleastaspreservedintheimpressionsfromtheFortificationarchive,

themodelingonPFUTS0250doesnot,however,havethedistinctivepatterned

musculatureoftheAssyrianreliefs.Thatsuchconventionswerecontinuedintothe

Achaemenidperiodisdocumented,forexample,intheexquisitelymodeledcarving

onPFS0016*(Figs.17-18),belongingtothedirectoroftheagency,Parnakka.23

PFUTS0250andPFS0016*thusexpressdifferentstrandsofthestrongAssyrianizing

tendenciesinearlyAchaemenidglypticinFārs.

Fort. 0839-401Thetabletcarriestwoseals,PFS0048,appliedtotheflat(left)edge(Figs.19-20),

andPFS3306,appliedtotheobverseandreverse(Figs.21-23).24

InthecaseofFort.0839-401,itappearsthatconventionalsealingprotocolswithin

thearchiveareatplay.PFS0048(Fig.20),thesealappliedtotheleftedgeofFort.0839-

401,isawell-knownsealwithinthearchive.Thesealoccursonlyontheleftedgeof

tablets,indicatingthatitrepresentsasupply(Elamitekurman)officeorofficial.25 The

sealappliedontheobverseandreverse,PFS3306(Fig.23),isasyetunattestedonany

otherdocumentwithinthearchive.26

GarrisonandHenkelman(inpress[a])haverecentlydiscussedtheadministrative

profileofPFS0048.Ithasasurprisinglycomplexdossierforasealthatexhibitsa

relativelystraight-forwardandconsistentsealingprotocol.27Thesealisdocumented

onsomeninety-threetabletstodate,makingitthefifthmostcommonlyoccurring

sealinthearchive.28Moreover,itappearsonallthreedocumenttypes,Elamite,

22 Foradiscussionofthecontinuousnarrativestyle,seeWatanabe2004(esp.pp.103-105).

23 ForPFS0016*,seeGarrisonandRoot2001:92–94,Cat.No.22;Garrison2014b:496–500,fig.7.

24 ForglypticsiglawithinthePersepolitanarchives,seeabovenote10.

25 Forsupply(kurman)operationswithinthearchive,andthesealingprotocolsassociatedwithsupply,see

Garrison2017:33-34,37-38,42,44,52-53,56;GarrisonandHenkelmaninpress(a).

26 Therearemanyhundredsofsealsthatoccurononlyonetabletinthesurvivingarchive.

27 GarrisonandHenkelman(inpress[a])provideanextensiveanalysisoftheadministrativecontextofPFS

0048;forthecurrentpurposes,wehighlightonlyafewselectissues.

28 Currently,3864distinctandlegiblesealshavebeenidentifiedintheFortificationarchive.



Aramaic,anduninscribed.29PFS0048occursonlyontheleftedgeoftabletsand,

withoneexception(PF-NN1308),alwaysinthecounter-sealprotocol.30Itrepresents

animportantgraindepot,perhapslocatedatPirdatkaš,towardstheeasternedgeof

the Fahliyānregion.Twoofficials,Bakumira(Bakamira)andKatukka,runthedepot.

TherearetwofeaturesofthedossierassociatedwithPFS0048thatmayhelp

explainitsapplicationonapotentiallyDemoticdocument.Firstly,asGarrisonand

Henkelmannote,thetextsthatnameBakumiraorKatukkaincludearelativelyhigh

percentageofunsealedmemorandawithirregularshapes;31thisvarietyoftablet

shapesuggeststhatthesupplydepotwithwhichtheyarelinkedhadahighdegree

offlexibilityinproducingdocuments.Secondly,PFS0048occursalsoonAramaic

anduninscribeddocuments;thisphenomenonsuggeststhatthesupplydepot“was

anadministrativecentreofsomeimportanceandcomplexity,includingscribeswho

couldreadandwriteAramaic”(GarrisonandHenkelmaninpress[a])--perhaps,we

maysurmise,apparentlyalsoDemotic!

PFS0048isoneofthegreatmasterpiecesofPersepolitanglyptic.Thesealis

verylargebyPersepolitanstandards;noimpressioncapturesthefullextentofthe

design.32Thepreservedlengthofthedesignis2.20cm,theheight1.30cm.Thescene,

aspreserved,isahumpedbullmarchanttotheleft.Givenitssize,itseemshighly

unlikelythattherewereanyotherfiguralelementstothescene.

29 Thereareonlysomethirty-onesealstodatethatappearonallthreedocumenttypes(thiscountisan

updatetoGarrison[2017:31-32],whichlistedtwenty-fourseals);PFS0048wouldthusbeoutstandingin

potentiallyoccurringonfourdifferentdocumenttypes(providedthatFort.0839-401isinfactwrittenin

Demotic).

30 GarrisonandHenkelman(inpress[a])addressPF-NN1308.

31 ForElamitedocuments,singletransactions/movementsofcommoditiesarerecordedontongue-shaped

tabletsthatwecallmemoranda;compilationsofmultipletransactions/movementsofcommodities

(journalsandaccounts)arerecordedonrectangulartabletsthatwecallregisters.Asisoftenthecase

withimportantsupplydepotssuchasthatassociatedwithPFS0048,thememorandaconsistofbothsealed

andunsealeddocuments.

32 Inthesamemannerastheimpressionontheflat(left)edgeofFort.0839-401,everyapplicationofPFS

0048,andtherearemanyofthem,iscarefullyrolledsothatthebulliscenteredalmostperfectlyonthe

leftedgeofthetablet.Noimpressionofthesealallowsustodeterminedefinitelywhetherthereismore

tothesceneor,ifjustahumpedbull,thespacingintheterminalfield.



Whatwetermsingle-animalstudies,i.e.,ascenethatconsistsofonlyoneanimal/

creature,areubiquitouswithinPersepolitanglyptic,numberingalmost400sealsto

date;withonlyafewexceptions,however,thesesingle-animalstudiesarecarved

onsmallstampseals.PFS0048isoneofonlyahandfulofcylindersealswhosescene

consistssolelyofasingleanimal.33

PFS0048isalsonoteworthyowingtoitscarvingstyle,whatwewouldcall

abaroqueversionofthePersepolitanModeledStyle.Volumetricmassisdeep;

musculatureisnervous,indicatedbytherisingandfallingofmass;insomepassages

musculatureistightlycoiled.Thecarvingisexceptionallyaccomplished.Thestyleis

mostcloselyparalleledbythemonumentalPFS0016*(Figs.17-18),thesecondsealof

Parnakka,thedirectoroftheagency.34

GarrisonandHenkelman(inpress[a])suggestthattheadministrativeprofile,

unusualimagery,andvirtuosiccarvingofPFS0048indicatethatwehavetodowith

aratherspecialoffice,onethatfarexceedstheconventionalrealmofresponsibility

(and,mostlikely,administrativerank)generallyassociatedwithcommoditysupply

(kurman)inthearchive.35

Asnoted,PFS3306(Fig.23)istodateattestedonlyonFort.0839-401(Figs.21-22).

Ifthecounter-sealprotocolisoperativehere,PFS3306wouldpotentiallyrepresent:

1)theindividualwhophysicallyreceivesthecommodities(suppliedbythekurman

official/officeassociatedwithPFS0048);2)anoversightofficial(Elamitešaramanna

and/or damanna)responsibleforsettingprovisionsforworkgroups;3)someother

officialchargedwithreceivingcommoditiesforanindividual,agroupofindividuals,

or animals.

33 Interestingly,thereisacylindersealintheTreasuryarchive,PTS41(Schmidt1957:33,pl.11),whichis

strikinglysimilartoPFS0048,bothintheme,ahumpedbullmarchant,andincarvingstyle.Othersingle

animalstudiesoncylindersealsinclude:PFS0014,PFS0732,andPFS1317.Wemayalsohavesingle-animal

studiesonthecylindersealsPFS1235,PFUTS0256,PFUTS0426,PFATS0069,andPFATS0322,butthe

fulllengthsofthedesignsarenotpreserved.PFS1235andPFUTS0256seemparticularlycloseinsubject,

scale,andcarvingstyletoPFS0048;wemayhavetodowithproductscomingfromasingleworkshop.

Weshouldnotealsothatasingleanimalpairedwithalargepaneledinscriptiononcylindersealsisa

relativelypopularthemeamonginscribedseals,numberingsomesixteenexamplestodate(Chandler,in

preparation).GiventhelargesizeofPFS0048,itseemsveryunlikelythatitalsocarriedaninscription.

34 ForPFS0016*,seenote23.

35 Commoditysupply(kurman)isthemostcommonlyattestedadministrativeactivityinthe

Fortificationarchive.



ThetwoimpressionsofthesealonFort.0839-401(Figs.21-22)arebrokenand

poorlypreserved,thesurfaceshavingseveralcracksandlacunae.Althoughthe

impressionsontheobverseandreverseofthetabletareclearlythesameseal,we

areunabledefinitivelytoreconstructthefullextentofthedesign.Nevertheless,in

ouropinion,theimpressionscapturemostofthefiguralelementsandclearlyindicate

thatthesealdesignwaswellexecuted.Thepreservedlengthofthedesignis3.20

cm;height1.90cm.Aswiththeothertwosealsdiscussedabove,PFS3306islargeby

Persepolitan standards.

ThesceneonPFS3306isacommononeinthearchive:anarcherinakneeling/

runningposeshootstowardagroupoftwoanimals,generallyapredatorattacking

acaprid,bull,ordeer.

Thearcherfacestotheleft.Hisbody,legs,arms,andheadareonlypartially

preserved.Onelegissharplybentandheldunderhistorso;theotherlegisnot

preserved,butmostlikelywasalsobentandstretchedoutbeforehistorso.Heholds

onearmsharplybentandbringsitupbehindhisheadtograspthebowstringand

arrow(neitherarepreservedinthispassage).36Heholdstheotherarmstraightand

extendsittotheleft,presumablytograspthegripofthebow.Onlyashortsectionof

thebowispreservedbelowtheextendedarm;itappearstohavebeenarecurvebow,

commonlydepictedinPersepolitanglyptic.Hewearsabeltedgarment;toolittleis

preservedtoallowforadefinitiveidentificationofthetypeofgarment.Possibilities

includetrousers,shorts,ortheAssyriangarmentconsistingofarobeovershorts.

Fringeorfoldsoccuronthegarmentalongtheforwardedgeofthebackleg.Ashort

pointedextensionatthefrontofhiswaistmayinfactbetheupturnedendofthe

recurvebow.Onhisbackhecarriesaquiver;partsofthreearrowsarepreserved.

Thecaprid/cervid,ofwhichonlytheforelegs,neck,andheadarepreserved,

wasmostlikelydirectlyinfrontofthearchertoleft.Itmovestotheleft.Thetwo

forelegsarebent,asifinarun.Asinglehornemergesfromthetopoftheheadand

thenbifurcatestotwobranches(theendsarenotpreserved).Twolongpointedears

emergefromthebackofthehead.Twostrandsofabearddependfromthelowerjaw.

Themaneisindicatedbyaserratededgealongthebackoftheneck.Athinpointed

element(onlypartiallypreserved)inthefieldimmediatelybelowtheearsofthe

animalmaybeanarrowinflight.

36 Handednessinarcherscenesisoftendifficulttodetermine;itisunclearwhetherwearemeant

toreadthearcher’storsoasfrontorback.



Therampantlionisimmediatelytotheleftofthecaprid.Itmovestotheright.It

liftsitsforwardhindlegtowardthecaprid.Itholdsoneforelegstraightandextendsit

upwarddiagonallybeforeitshead.Itholdstheotherforeleg(onlypartiallypreserved)

straightandextendsitdownwarddiagonallybeforeitschest.Thetail(thetipisnot

preserved)curlsupward.Ashortpointedearandtwosmalltuftsofhairemergefrom

thetopofthehead.Thelionisithyphallicandhasitsmouthopen.

Acrescent-shapedelement,theendsofwhicharenotpreserved,inthefieldabove

theheadofthearchermaybealunarcrescent.37

Ashortsectionoftheedgeofthesealispreservedatthebottomofthedesign.

ArchersceneswithinPersepolitanglypticareverypopular,numberingtodate

almost300examples.38Theyrepresentanexceptionallyrichthematiccategoryowing

tothewidevarietyofcompositionalformatsandthewealthoficonographicdetail.

Anarcher,ofteninakneeling/runningpose,shootingtowardagroupofoneanimal

attackinganother,isawellattestedcompositionaltypeatPersepolis.39Noteworthy

onPFS3306isthedepictionofaquiverwitharrows,aniconographicelementthat,

curiously,rarelyisdepictedinarcherscenesinPersepolitanglyptic.40Iftheelement

behindtheheadofthecaprid/cervidisanarrow,itwouldindicatethatthescene

rendersasenseoftimeviaspentarrows.41

Giventheunevenpreservationoftheimpressions,itisdifficulttoconcludedetails

aboutthecarvingstyle.Ingeneral,thehumanandanimalformsappearratherdeeply

carved;thereisasinuousoutlinetoboththearcherandtherampantlion.Wewould

suggestthatthecarvingrepresentsyetanotherversionofthePersepolitanModeled

Stylewhereincarvingisdeep,butthereislittleattentiontosurfacemodulation(in

comparisontotheextravagantmodeledcarvingexhibitedbyPFS0048).

37 Alternatively,thiselementcouldbethedistortedremnantsofthetopendofthebow.

38 ForapreliminarydiscussionofarcherimagerywithinPersepolitanglyptic,seeGarrison2010a.

39 SeeGarrison(2010a:351-55),forexamplesofarchersinthekneeling/runningpose,scenessimilartoPFS

3306,andpossiblelinkagesofthekneeling/runningarchertotheimageryontypeIIroyalcoinage.

40 Aparticularlystriking(andrare)exampleofanarcherwearingthePersiancourtrobeandhavingaquiver

witharrowsisPFS0071*,oneoftheearliestdatedexamplesofcourt-centriciconographyinPersepolitan

glyptic(discussedinmoredetailinGarrison2017:71-75,fig.2.23).

41 TheconceitisdiscussedinsomedetailinGarrisonandHenkelmaninpress(b).



SummaryWhilethepossibleDemotictextsonthetwotabletsthatarethefocusofthisstudy

arequiteexceptionalwithinthePersepolitanarchives,thesealsappliedtothetablets

firmlygroundthosedocumentswithinthecontextofPersepolis.Twooftheseals,PFS

0048andPFUTS0250,occuronothertabletswithintheFortificationarchive.PFS0048

itselfisoneofthemostfrequentlyoccurringsealsintheFortificationarchiveand

representsanimportantandwell-knowncommoditysupplydepot.Whiletwoofthe

threeseals,PFS0048andPFUTS0250,presentquiterareimagery,theirstyleiswell

documentedatPersepolis.42PFS3306ismainstreamPersepolitanglypticinbothits

imageryandstyle.

Thus,wecansaythatwhateverthenatureofthetransactionsrecordedinthese

Demotictablets,theyappeartobeentrenchedwithintheadministrativesystem

representedbytheFortificationarchive.PFS0048,moreover,clearlycontextualizes

oneofthedocumentswithintheorbitoftheimportantgraindepot,perhapslocated

atPirdatkaš,intheeasternedgeoftheFahliyānregion.

WecouldperhapsspeculatethattheDemotictextsarerelatedtotravelrations.

PFS0048frequentlyoccursontheleftedgeoftravelrations,signallythesupplyof

travellersfromthisimportantdepotinFahliyān.43PFS0048andPFUTS0250both

occuralsoonuninscribeddocuments.Theexactfunctionofthesedocumentsremains

unknown,butthelinkagestotravelviathosesealsthatoccuronbothElamiteand

uninscribeddocuments(asopposedtothosesealsthatappearonlyononedocument

type)iswellattested.44Lastly,PFS0048alsooccursonAramaicdocumentsmanyof

whichclearlyareconcernedwithtravelrations.45

42 WithoutdoubtthemostintriguingsealamongthethreeisPFUTS0250,whichpresentsawonderfully

innovativedesign,unique,asfaraswecantell,withinAchaemenidglyptic.Giventhatthesealalsooccurs

ontwouninscribeddocuments,itseemsunlikelythatwemaylinkthesealspecificallytotheappearance

oftheDemotictexts(i.e.,theuniquesealisnotlimitedtouniqueDemotictexts).

43 GarrisonandHenkelmaninpress(a).

44 Garrison2008:180-84;Garrison2017:30-32,45-49.

45 Azzoni2008:258,260-61.



Abbreviations

Fort. Unpublished Persepolis Fortification tablets and Elamite texts recorded by the

PersepolisFortificationArchiveProject.

PF ElamitePersepolisFortificationtextspublishedinHallock1969.

PFAT Persepolis Fortification tabletswithmonolingualAramaic texts and/or theAramaic

texts on them.

PF-NN ElamitePersepolisFortificationtextscitedfromdrafteditionsbyRichardT.Hallock,

collatedandcorrectedbyWouterF.M.Henkelman.

PFS PersepolisFortificationSeals,citedaccordingtoGarrisonandRoot1998,withupdates

by Mark B. Garrison.

Bibliography

Azzoni,A.2008.TheBowmanMSandtheAramaicTablets,inP.Briant,W.F.M.Henkelman,

M.W.Stolper(eds.)Les archives de fortifications de Persépolis: État des questions et perspectives

de recherches(Persika12)Paris:253-274.

Azzoni,A.2017.TheEmpireasVisibleintheAramaicDocumentsfromPersepolis,in:B.

Jacobs,W.F.M.HenkelmanandM.W.Stolper(eds.),Die Verwaltung im Achämenidenreich—

Imperiale Muster und Strukturen / The Administration of the Achaemenid Empire—Tracing the

Imperial Signature(ClassicaetOrientalia17)Wiesbaden:255-268.

Azzoni,A.,E.R.M.Dusinberre,M.B.Garrison,W.F.M.Henkelman,C.E.Jones,andM.W.

Stolper,2017.PersepolisAdministrativeArchives Encyclopædia Iranica, online edition,

availableathttp://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/persepolis-admin-archive(accessed

on05July2018).

Azzoni, A. and J. Tavernier, Scribal Confusion in Aramaic Renderings of Iranian

Anthroponyms.APreliminaryStudy,forthcoming.

Balcer,J.M.1979.reviewofJ.Hofstetter,Die Griechen in Persien, Bibliotheca Orientalis36:279-80.

Barnett,R.D.1976.Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (668-627 B.C.).

London.

Brixhe,C.2004.Corpus des Inscriptions paléo-phrygiennes,SupplémentII,Kadmos43:118-126.

Chandler, C. in preparation. Image, Text, and Status: The Inscribed Seals from the Persepolis

Fortification Archive.PhDBrynMawrCollege.

Collon,D.2001.Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum: Cylinder Seals V:

Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian Periods. London.



Elayi,J.andElayi,A.G.2004.Le monnayage de la cité phénicienne de Sidon à l’époque perse (Ve-IVe s.

av. J.-C.),TomeI:Texte.TranseuphratèneSupp.11.Paris.

Garrison,M.B.2002.The“LateNeo-Elamite”GlypticStyle:APerspectivefromFars.Bulletin

of the Asian Institute16:65-102.

Garrison,M.B.2008.TheUninscribedTabletsfromtheFortificationArchive:aPreliminary

Analysis,inP.Briant,W.F.M.Henkelman,M.W.Stolper(eds.)Les archives de fortifications

de Persépolis: État des questions et perspectives de recherches(Persika12)Paris:149-238.

Garrison,M.B.2010a.ArchersatPersepolis:TheEmergenceofRoyalIdeologyattheHeartof

theEmpire,inJ.CurtisandSt.JohnSimpson(eds.),The World of Achaemenid Persia, History,

Art and Society in Iran and the Ancient Near East, London:I.B.Tauris:337–68.

Garrison,M.B.2010b.TheHeroicEncounterintheVisualArtsofAncientIraqandIran

c.1000–500B.C,inD.B.CountsandB.Arnold(eds.),The Master of Animals in Old World

Iconography.Archaeolingua24.Budapest:151–74.

Garrison,M.B.2011.TheSealof“KuraštheAnzanite,SonofŠešpeš”(Teispes),PFS93*:

Susa–Anšan–Persepolis,inJ.Alvarez-MonandM.B.Garrison(eds.),Elam and Persia,

WinonaLake:375–405.

Garrison,M.B.2014a.RoyalNameSealsofDariusI,inW.F.M.Henkelman,C.J.Jones,and

C.Wood(eds.),Extraction and Control: Studies in Honor of Matthew W. Stolper(Studiesin

AncientOrientalCivilizations68)Chicago:67–104.

Garrison,M.B.2014b.GlypticStudiesasArtHistory,inB.A.BrownandM.H.Feldman(eds),

Critical Approaches to Ancient Near Eastern Art,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter:481–513.

Garrison,M.B.2017.The Ritual Landscape at Persepolis: Glyptic Imagery from the Persepolis

Fortification and Treasury Archives (StudiesinAncientOrientalCivilization72)Chicago.

Garrison,M.B.andW.F.M.Henkelman.Inpress(a).SigilophobeSuppliersandIdiosyncratic

Scribes:AdministrativeProfileandGlypticBehaviorinthePersepolisFortification

Archive,inE.R.M.Dusinberre,M.B.Garrison,andW.F.M.Henkelman(eds.),The Art of

Empire in Achaemenid Persia: Festschrift in Honor of Margaret Cool Root,AchaemenidHistory.

Leiden:NederlandsInstituutvoorhetNabijeOosten.

Garrison,M.B.andW.F.M.Henkelman.Inpress(b).Communication, Language and Power in the

Achaemenid Empire: Volume 2: The Seals and Bullae of the Satrap Aršāma.Oxford.

Garrison,M.B.andR.K.Ritner.2010.FromthePersepolisFortificationArchives,2:Sealswith

EgyptianHieroglyphicInscriptionsatPersepolis.ARTA2010.002.

Garrison,M.B.andM.C.Root,2001.Seals on the Persepolis Fortification Tablets. VolumeI: Images

of Heroic Encounter.OrientalInstitutePublications117.Chicago.

Gökce,B.,Işik,K.,andDeğirmencioğlu,H.2013.OnUrartianChariots,inA.J.Veldmeijer

andS.Ikram,Chasing Chariots: Proceedings of the First International Chariot Conference (Cairo

2012),Leiden:107-22.



Hallock,R.T.1969.Persepolis Fortification Tablets.OrientalInstitutePublications92.Chicago.

Hallock,R.T.1977.TheUseofSealsonthePersepolisFortificationTablets,inMcG.Gibson

andR.D.Biggs(eds.),Seals and Sealing in the Ancient Near East.BibliothecaMesopotamica

6,Malibu:127-33.

Henkelman,W.F.M.2008.The Other Gods Who Are: Studies in Elamite-Iranian Acculturation based

on the Persepolis Fortification Texts. AchaemenidHistory14,Leiden.

Henkelman,W.F.M.2017a.EgyptiansinthePersepolisArchives,in:M.Wasmuth, Ägypto-

persische Herrscher- und Herrschaftspräsentation in der Achämenidenzeit(OriensetOccidens

27)Stuttgart:276-302,386-94.

Henkelman,W.F.M.2017b. ImperialSignatureand ImperialParadigm:Achaemenid

administrativestructureandsystemacrossandbeyondtheIranianplateau,inJacobs,B.,

W.F.M.HenkelmanandM.W.Stolper(eds.),Die Verwaltung im Achämenidenreich—Imperiale

Muster und Strukturen / The Administration of the Achaemenid Empire—Tracing the Imperial

Signature(ClassicaetOrientalia17)Wiesbaden:45-256.

Littauer,M.A.andCrouwel,J.H.1979.Wheeled Vehicles and Ridden Animals in the Ancient Near

East(HandbuchderOrientalistik7.1.2.B.1).Leiden.

Mitchell,T.C.andSearight,A.2008.Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum.

Stamp Seals III: Impressions of Stamp Seals on Cuneiform Tablets, Clay Bullae, and Jar Handles.

Leiden.

Radner,K.2008.TheDelegationofPower:Neo-AssyrianBureauSeals,inP.Briant,W.F.M.

Henkelman&M.W.Stolper(eds.),L’archive des Fortifications de Persépolis: État des questions

et perspectives de recherches(Persika12),Paris:481-515.

Rougemont,G.2012,Inscriptions grecques d’Iran et d’Asie centrale(CorpusInscriptionum

Iranicarum,PartII,vol.1),London.

Sacco,A.2013.ArtandImperialIdeology:RemarksontheDepictionofRoyalChariotson

WallReliefsinNew-KingdomEgyptandtheNeo-AssyrianEmpire,inA.J.Veldmeijer

andS.Ikram,Chasing Chariots: Proceedings of the First International Chariot Conference (Cairo

2012),Leiden:203-15.

Schmidt,E.F.1957.Persepolis 2. Contents of the Treasury and Other Discoveries.OrientalInstitute

Publications69.Chicago.

Schmitt,R.1989.EinaltiranischesFlüssigkeitsmass;marišin:K.Heller,O.PanaglandJ.

Tischler(eds.) Indogermanica Europaea, Festschrift für Wolfgang Meid zum 60. Geburtstag am

12.11.89(GrazerLinguistischeMonographien4)Graz:301-315.

Stolper,M.W.1984.TheNeo-BabylonianTextfromthePersepolisFortification, Journal of

Near Eastern Studies 43:299-310.

Stolper,M.W.2017.PersepolisFortificationArchiveProject,inOriental Institute Annual Report

2016-2017.Chicago:155-160.



Stolper,M.W.andJ.Tavernier2007.FromthePersepolisFortificationArchiveProject,1:

AnOldPersianAdministrativeTabletfromthePersepolisFortification,ARTA2007.001.

Tavernier,J.2007.Iranica in the Achaemenid Period (circa 550-330 B.C.): Lexicon of Old Iranian

Proper Names and Loanwords, Attested in Non-Iranian Texts.(OLA158)Leuven.

Tavernier,J.2008.MultilingualismintheFortificationandTreasuryArchives,inP.Briant,

W.F.M.Henkelman,M.W.Stolper(eds.)Les archives de fortifications de Persépolis: État des

questions et perspectives de recherches(Persika12)Paris:59-86.

Watanabe,C.2004.The“ContinuousStyle”intheNarrativeSchemeofAssurbanipal’s

Reliefs, Iraq66:103-114.



Fig. 1. Obverse of Fort. 2131-401.

Fig. 2. Drawing of the obverse of Fort. 2131-401 (by Brian Muhs).




Fig. 4. Drawing of Fort. 0849-401 (by Brian Muhs).



Fig. 5. Reverse of Fort. 2131-401.

Fig. 6. Collated line drawing of PFUTS 0250 (by Erin Daly).



Fig. 7. Obverse of PFUT 0155-201. Fig. 8. Reverse of PFUT 0155-201.

Fig. 9. Bottom edge of PFUT 0155-201.

Fig. 10. Obverse of PFUT 0167-205.



Fig. 11. PFS 591 applied on the reverse of PF 0341.

Fig. 12. Collated line drawing of PFS 0591.



Fig. 13. PFS 308 applied to the left edge of PF 1117.


Fig. 15. Slabs 20-21, Room C, North Palace of Aššurbanipal at Nineveh (BM 124850) (©Trustees of the British Museum).



Fig. 16. Slabs 23-25, Room C, North Palace of Aššurbanipal at Nineveh (BM 124853-54) (©Trustees of the British Museum).

Fig. 17. PFS 16* applied to the left edge of PF 0665.

Fig. 18. Collated line drawing of PFS 0016*.



Fig. 19. Flat (left) edge of Fort. 0839-401.





Fig. 22. Reverse of Fort. 0839-401.

Fig. 23. Collated line drawing of PFS 3306 (by Christina Chandler).

ArtaDirecteur de la publication : Pierre Briant

[email protected]

ISSN 2110-6118

© Achemenet / Annalisa Azzoni, Christina Chandler, Erin Daly, Mark B. Garrison,

Jan Johnson and Brian Muhs.