|
SAMARQAND,
History
and
Archeology.
Since
the
publication
of
the
entry
afr@as^@ab
(EIr.
I,
pp.
576-78)
new
information
has
been
brought
to
light
on
this
archeological
site
and,
consequently,
on
the
history
of
pre-Mongol
Samarqand.
This
progress
is
mainly
a
result
of
the
activities
of
the
MAFOUZ
(Mission
Arche‚ologique
Franco-Ouzbeàke),
which
commenced
in
1989
and
continues
to
date.
Concerning
the
foundation
of
the
city,
which
resulted
from
the
fortification
of
the
plateau
(already
sporadically
occupied
in
the
Bronze
and
Early
Iron
Ages),
a
pre-Achaemenid
date,
between
ca.
650
and
ca.
550
B.C.E.,
seems
now
confirmed.
The
specific
character
of
this
first
urban
foundation
stands
out
more
clearly.
A
wall
follows
the
whole
circuit
of
the
plateau
(5.5
km),
complemented
by
another
one
which
separates
the
town
from
the
acropolis,
situated
in
the
northern
part
and
itself
including
a
citadel
raised
on
an
artificial
platform.
These
topographical-functional
features
were
to
last
as
long
as
the
town
was
centered
on
this
site.
The
existence
inside
Afra@sia@b
of
an
artificial
water
supply
through
the
Dargom
channel
(extending
40
km
from
the
Zarafæa@n
River),
a
branch
of
which
entered
through
the
southern
gate,
is
archeologically
confirmed
for
the
Achaemenid
period
only;
but
it
seems
probable
that
it
existed
from
the
beginning.
The
wall,
7
m
thick,
is
massive,
in
contrast
to
those
which
were
built
upon
it
in
the
city's
Achaemenid
and
Greek
periods.
It
is
made
of
coarse
mud
bricks
of
plano-convex
shape,
all
of
which
bear
a
mark,
an
indication
that
labor
was
strictly
organized
in
groups
of
workers
at
the
initiative
of
the
local
political
power.
Similar
building
techniques
have
been
noticed
at
other
Sogdian
and
pre-Sogdian
sites
during
that
pre-Achaemenid
period:
Kok
Tepe
(30
km
north
of
Samarqand,
with
similar
brick
marks,
a
fact
which
suggests
a
contemporary
foundation),
Padaiatak
Tepe
and
Sangyr
Tepe
near
ˆahr-e
Sabz,
Eilatan
and
Dal'verzin
Tepe
(q.v.)
in
Farg@ana
(q.v.).
The
Greek
occupation
appears
to
be
divided
into
two
phases,
the
first
lasting
from
Alexander
to
some
date
in
the
second
half
of
the
3rd
century
B.C.E.
and
the
second,
a
shorter
period
of
reconquest
under
the
Greco-Bactrian
king
Eucratides
(r.
ca.
171-145
B.C.E.).
The
pottery
complex
differs
markedly
between
these
two
phases,
which
seem
to
have
been
separated
by
a
period
of
nomadic
invasion,
at
a
time
when
the
Greek
line
of
defense
was
temporarily
shifted
to
the
south
(as
witnessed
also
by
the
earliest
wall
brought
to
light
by
excavations
in
the
strategic
pass
at
Derbent
[see
darband,
fortifications]).
In
addition
to
the
fortifications,
the
Greek
garrison
(in
the
first
phase)
left
its
mark
with
a
large
granary,
built
in
the
center
of
the
acropolis,
at
a
place
now
buried
deep
below
the
mosque.
The
peak
of
the
pre-Islamic
Sogdian
civilization
is
mostly
documented
from
the
excavations
at
Panjikent
(q.v.).
At
Samarqand,
the
major
source
of
evidence
for
this
period
is
the
aristocratic
residence
which
stood
just
inside
Wall
III,
which
constituted
the
southern
limit
of
the
fortified
town
between
the
6th
and
8th
centuries
C.E.
The
famous
wall
paintings
which
were
commissioned
for
a
reception
hall
ca.
660
C.E.,
probably
by
King
Varkhuman
himself,
are
the
object
of
ongoing
study
and
interpretation.
Contrary
to
what
had
been
proposed
in
afr@as^@ab,
the
whole
composition
is
no
longer
believed
to
be
related
to
the
arrival
of
embassies
at
Samarqand
(which
forms
the
specific
theme
of
the
western
wall),
but
to
more
varied
themes
of
geopolitics
and
royal
propaganda:
the
dynastic
cult
(southern
wall),
the
greatness
of
the
Chinese
ally
(northern
wall),
Indian
legends
(eastern
wall).
A
substantial
amount
of
information
(sometimes
complementary
and
sometimes
conflicting
with
the
picture
hitherto
drawn
from
textual
sources)
has
come
to
light
concerning
the
8th
century.
Excavations
carried
out
beneath
the
mosque
have
revealed
evidence
for
a
rapid
succession
of
monumental
buildings.
A
massive
enclosure,
perhaps
the
temenos
of
the
pre-Islamic
temple
mentioned
in
the
sources,
was
razed
some
time
after
the
Arab
conquest
of
712.
Instead
of
a
first
mosque,
as
was
hitherto
assumed,
the
site
was
occupied
by
a
large
palace
(ca
115
x
84
m),
built
in
the
740s
(according
to
numismatic
evidence),
and
it
is
therefore
attributable
to
the
last
Omayyad
governor,
NasÂr
b.
Sayy@ar.
Architecturally,
it
appears
as
a
transitional
building,
combining
features
inherited
from
earlier
Sogdian
palaces
(a
rectangular
'throne
hall',
corridors),
and
others
that
are
more
innovative
(such
as
beyts,
i.e.,
rooms
grouped
in
a
rectangle
around
a
courtyard
or
hall).
Some
of
the
baked
bricks
had
been
lavishly
used
for
pavements
–
another
innovation.
They
carry
Kufic
inscriptions,
most
often
consisting
÷xæyd,
i.e.,
ekòæ^d,
the
Sogdian
royal
title.
It
is
conjectured
that
the
then
representative
of
the
local
dynasty,
residing
outside
Samarqand
and
still
in
charge
of
tax
collection,
had
agreed
to
pay
part
of
it
in
kind
to
contribute
to
the
building
of
the
governor's
palace.
Some
time
between
765
and
780
sections
of
the
palace
were
leveled
to
make
room
for
the
Friday
mosque,
which
was
first
built
on
a
square
plan,
and
then
(probably
at
the
beginning
of
the
Samanid
period,
ca.
820-30)
enlarged
towards
the
western
direction,
which
led
to
the
leveling
of
the
remaining
parts
of
the
palace.
Finds
made
in
the
palace
include
exercises
in
Arabic,
which
testify
to
the
existence
of
a
maktab,
as
well
as
the
earliest
set
of
chess
pieces
ever
discovered
in
an
archeological
context.
Important
fragments
of
the
stucco
decoration
of
the
qebla
wall
of
the
first
mosque,
buried
after
the
enlargement
of
the
building,
belong
to
the
pre-Samarra
Abbasid
style,
hitherto
known
only
from
examples
in
Syria,
Iraq,
and
Fa@rs.
Before
that,
in
the
early
750s,
a
second
Arab
palace
had
been
erected
to
the
east
of
the
citadel,
evidently
by
Abu
Moslem
(although
written
sources
credit
him
only
with
the
construction
of
the
wall
around
the
oasis).
The
regularity
of
its
plan
stands
in
marked
contrast
to
the
previous
palace
and
indicates
the
work
of
an
architect
from
Iran
or
the
Near
East.
The
same
applies
to
the
use
of
porticoes
of
octagonal
columns,
built
in
mud
brick
in
both
the
inner
and
the
outer
courtyard.
An
eyv@an
opened
to
the
latter
(instead
of
into
a
closed
throne
hall).
This
palace
never
received
any
decoration,
which
is
not
consistent
with
the
high
representative
functions
it
was
obviously
destined
to
fulfill.
After
an
interruption,
no
doubt
caused
by
Abu
Moslem's
execution
in
755,
it
was
eventually
completed
with
radical
alterations
to
the
original
plan,
the
porticoes
being
replaced
by
corridors.
Some
parts
of
the
palace
subsisted
until
the
10th
century.
(However,
the
d@ar
al-em@ara
mentioned
by
Esátáakòri
and
Ebn
H®awqal
at
the
citadel
was
probably
a
later
construction).
Knowledge
of
the
two
last
centuries
of
Afra@sia@b
has
also
progressed
substantially.
Above
the
leveled
ruins
of
Abu
Moslem's
palace
in
the
northern
section
overlooking
the
Si@ab
river,
pavilions
were
added
in
the
Qarakò@anid
period
(11th-12th
centuries),
as
an
extension
of
a
new
palace
built
on
the
citadel
(where
these
levels
have
been
entirely
destroyed
by
early
archeologists).
Since
the
year
2000,
the
excavation
of
one
of
these
pavilions
has
brought
to
light
collapsed
remains
of
remarkable
painted
decoration,
almost
the
only
evidence
for
mural
painting
so
far
reported
in
Transoxania
for
this
period.
It
comprises
birds
in
a
floral
and
calligraphic
setting
(apparently
based
on
Persian
poetry),
dancers,
a
frieze
of
hunting
dogs,
and
fragments
of
a
large
composition
with
Turkish
guards
presenting
the
ruler
with
symbols
of
power
(the
figure
of
an
archer
has
been
restored).
The
very
last
phase
at
Afra@sia@b
was
marked
by
a
reconstruction
of
the
palace
at
the
citadel
(mentioned
in
1221
by
the
Chinese
traveler
Changchun)
and
by
a
complete
rebuilding
of
the
Friday
mosque,
commissioned
(according
to
the
Persian
chronicler
Jovayni)
by
MohÂammad
b.
Tekeæ
after
his
bloody
capture
of
the
town
in
1212.
Excavations
have
shown
that
the
latter
project
was
suddenly
abandoned
even
before
the
monumental
pillars
had
been
built
above
floor
level.
They
were
replaced
by
wooden
columns,
probably
requisitioned
ones.
The
reason
for
this
change
was
most
probably
the
Mongol
threat,
which
led
to
a
massive
reinforcement
of
the
fortifications
at
the
citadel
and
at
the
gates.
The
first
datable
fortification
of
the
oasis
is
the
Div@ar-e
Qi@amat,
initiated
by
Abu
Moslem
and
completed
under
H@arun
al-Raæid,
along
a
circuit
of
about
35
km.
Its
gates
were
dismantled
under
the
Samanids,
and
only
a
few
sections
survive
today.
A
transverse
wall,
the
Div@ar-e
Kundalyang,
now
entirely
destroyed,
cannot
be
dated.
Its
attribution
to
the
Achaemenid
period
rests
only
upon
the
"LXX
stades"
given
by
Curtius
Rufus
7.6.10
for
the
city
wall
of
Maracanda.
However,
this
figure
is
suspected
to
be
corrupted
from
XXX,
i.e.,
5.5
km,
which
is
exactly
the
perimeter
of
Afra@sia@b.
The
transfer
of
city
life
to
the
south
of
Afra@sia@b,
completed
shortly
after
the
Mongol
invasion,
was
already
on
the
way
in
the
11th-12th
centuries.
For
this
period
temporary
disruptions
of
the
water
supply,
due
to
the
continuous
rise
of
the
occupation
level,
can
be
observed
in
the
northern
part
of
the
plateau.
Ceramists'
quarters
were
gradually
moving
upstream
along
the
channel
branches.
According
to
the
descriptions
by
Arab
geographers,
the
main
commercial
center
was
around
the
Ra÷s
al-T@aq,
the
embankment
which
led
the
water
channel
through
the
southern
gate.
Archeology
is
of
little
help
here,
because
of
the
presence
of
the
modern
town.
It
has
been
supposed
that
the
wall
that
was
built
later
on
by
Timur
in
order
to
encircle
his
town
had
taken
the
place
of
a
suburb
wall
already
existing
before
the
Mongols.
However,
there
is
no
archeological
proof
for
this.
The
main
sources
of
information
for
the
southern
suburb
in
that
period
are
two
waqf
documents
from
1066.
One
concerns
the
endowment
for
a
madrasa,
situated
in
the
southern
part
of
Afra@sia@b
(although
this
has
been
disputed),
but
perhaps
the
madrasa
does
not
in
fact
correspond
to
the
remains
excavated
in
front
of
the
mausoleum
of
Qotòam
b.
¿Abb@as.
The
second
document
creates
a
hospital
for
the
poor,
which
is
situated
somewhere
to
the
south
of
the
main
bazaar.
Both
give
precise
locations
and
descriptions
for
the
various
estates
listed
in
the
endowments,
mostly
kò@ans
(caravansarais),
all
of
which
appear
to
be
in
the
bazaar
zone
or
in
its
vicinity.
Some
toponyms
have
survived
until
modern
times,
such
as
the
Ùah@ar
Suq
and
the
'Sand
(place)
of
the
merchants',
probably
predecessors
of
the
Regist@an
square,
at
the
crossroads
of
the
oasis.
The
capture
of
Samarqand
by
the
Mongols
left
it
with
one-quarter
or
even
less
of
its
former
population
(evaluated
by
Changchun
to
"more
than
100,000
households"
in
the
oasis
before
the
conquest).
Moreover,
this
remaining
population
did
not
include
the
craftsmen
who
were
transported
to
Mongolia
and
subsequently,
in
a
second
wave
(under
Ögedey),
to
Sim@ah
(Siun-ma-lin),
north
of
Peking,
where
they
introduced
vine
growing
and
a
particular
kind
of
brocade.
Samarqand
had
by
then
become
part
of
the
ulus
of
Ùa@g@at@ay.
The
huge
losses
in
working
population
were
certainly
the
decisive
factor
for
the
abandonment
of
Afra@sia@b,
whose
water
supply
required
more
skills
and
labor
than
the
southern
suburb.
According
to
the
Moroccan
traveller
Ebn
BatÂtÂutáa,
who
stayed
in
Samarqand
in
1333
(or
1335),
it
did
not
have
functioning
walls
or
gates
anymore,
and
many
monuments
were
in
ruins.
However,
the
bazaar
was
again
prosperous,
and
the
complex
around
the
grave
of
Qotòam
(the
only
part
of
Afra@sia@b
still
occupied)
was
splendidly
built.
In
1371,
Timur
chose
Samarqand
as
his
capital
and
immediately
had
the
new
site
fortified
by
a
new
wall
and
a
citadel
in
its
western
part,
containing
the
Kok
Sara@y,
a
palace
used
only
for
ceremonies
.
The
court
and
the
army
lived
in
the
gardens
built
around
the
town.
The
rebuilding
of
the
city
on
its
new
site
was
resumed
on
a
grand
scale
after
Timur's
return
from
his
western
campaigns
in
1396,
in
particular
with
the
construction
of
the
Friday
mosque
(Bibi
K¨a@num)
next
to
the
northern
gates
and
the
opening
of
the
bazaar
mainstreet
between
the
mosque
and
the
Regista@n
area.
Craftsmen
deported
from
all
the
conquered
countries
contributed
to
the
new
buildings,
and
some
villages
in
the
vicinity
are
still
named
after
their
places
of
origin
(ˆir@az,
Demaæq).
From
that
period
onwards,
archeological
information
comes
more
from
the
recording
of
monuments
still
standing
(see
samarqand.
monuments)
than
from
excavations,
with
the
exceptions
of
the
citadel
(destroyed
in
the
Tsarist
and
Soviet
periods)
and
the
observatory
built
by
Ulug@-Beg
in
1421
to
the
northeast
of
Afra@sia@b
and
rediscovered
in
1908.
After
the
final
conquest
of
Timurid
Samarqand
by
MohÂammad
ˆayb@ani
(in
1500),
the
function
of
capital
of
Transoxania
was
transfered
to
Bukhara
(q.v.).
The
ˆayb@anids
and
their
successors,
the
Astrakò@anids,
continued
however
to
embellish
Samarqand:
the
Regista@n
square
received
its
final
form
with
three
madrasas
in
1660.
A
sharp
decline
occured
in
the
18th
century,
with
Kazakh
inroads,
dynastic
strife,
and
eventually
an
occupation
by
N@ader
ˆ@ah's
army
in
1740-47.
Already
in
the
1720s,
the
city
was
almost
deserted
and
the
madrasas
on
the
Regista@n
were
turned
into
winter
stables
by
nomads.
Recovery
was
slow
and
incomplete.
At
the
time
of
the
Russian
conquest
in
1868,
the
city
numbered
only
55,128
inhabitants,
in
contrast
to
figures
known
for
the
13th
century
(see
above)
and
today
(about
500,000).
Bibliography
(titles
quoted
in
the
article
afr@as^@ab
are
not
repeated):
Studies
based
mainly
on
archeological
material.
Kh.
G.
Akhun-babev,
Dvorets
Ikhshidov
Sogda
na
Afrasiabe
(The
palace
of
the
Ikhshids
of
Sogd
at
Afra@sia@b),
Samarkand,
1999.
P.
Bernard,
"Maracanda-Afrasiab
colonie
grecque,"
in
La
Persia
e
l'Asia
centrale
da
Alessandro
al
X
secolo
(Atti
dei
convegni
Lincei
127),
Rome,
1996,
pp.
331-65.
P.
Bernard,
F.
Grenet,
M.
Isamiddinov,
"Fouilles
de
la
mission
franco-sovie‚tique
aà
l'ancienne
Samarkand
(Afrasiab):
premieàre
campagne,
1989"
and
"Fouilles
de
la
mission
franco-ouzbeàque
aà
l'ancienne
Samarkand
(Afrasiab):
deuxieàme
et
troisieàme
campagnes
(1990-1991),"
Comptes
Rendus
de
l'Acade‚mie
des
Inscriptions
&
Belles-lettres,
1990,
pp.
356-80
;
1992,
pp.
275-311.
Iu.
F.
Buryakov,
ed.,
K
istorichesko¥
topografii
drevnego
i
srednevekovogo
Samarkanda
(About
the
historical
topography
of
ancient
and
medieval
Samarkand),
Tashkent,
1981.
E.
Iu.
Buryakova,
"K
planirovke
i
fortifikatsii
Samarkandsko¥
tsitadeli
XIV-XIX
vv.
(About
the
plan
of
the
fortifications
of
the
citadel
of
Samarkand,
14th-19th
centuries),
in
G.
A.
Pugachenkova,
ed.,
Kul'tura
srednevo
Vostoka.
Gradostroitel'stvo
i
arkhitektura,
Tashkent,
1989,
pp.
115-25.
G.
V.
Chichkina
[Shishkina],
"Les
remparts
de
Samarcande
aà
l'e‚poque
helle‚nistique,"
in
P.
Leriche,
H.
Tre‚ziny,
eds.,
La
fortification
dans
l'histoire
du
monde
grec,
Paris,
1986,
pp.
71-78,
figs.
287-302.
F.
Grenet,
"L'Inde
des
astrologues
sur
une
peinture
sogdienne
du
VIIe
sieàcle,"
in
C.
Cereti,
M.
Maggi,
E.
Provasi,
eds.,
Religious
Themes
and
Texts
in
Pre-Islamic
Iran
and
Central
Asia.
Studies
in
Honour
of
Professor
Gherardo
Gnoli,
Wiesbaden,
2002.
F.
Grene
[Grenet],
I.
D.
Ivanitski¥,
"Dvorets
omeyadskogo
namestnika
pod
mechet'yu
Abbasidskogo
perioda
na
Afrasiabe"
(The
palace
of
the
Umayyad
governor
under
the
mosque
from
the
Abbasid
period
at
Afrasiab),
in
T.
Sh.
Shirinov,
ed.,
Arkheologiya,
numizmatika
i
epigrafika
srednevekovo¥
Sredne¥
Azii,
Samarkand,
2000,
pp.
58-62.
F.
Grenet,
C.
Rapin,
"De
la
Samarkand
antique
aà
la
Samarkand
me‚die‚vale:
continuite‚s
et
ruptures,"
in
R.
P.
Gayraud,
ed.,
Colloque
international
d'arche‚ologie
islamique,
Cairo,
1998,
pp.
387-402.
O.
N.
Inevatkina,
"Fortifikatsiya
akropolya
drevnego
Samarkanda
v
seredine
pervogo
tysyacheletiya
do
n.e."
(The
fortification
of
the
acropolis
of
ancient
Samarkand
in
the
middle
of
the
1st
millenium
B.C.E.),
Material'naya
kul'tura
Vostoka
3,
Moscow,
2002,
pp.
24-46.
E.
D.
Ivanitski¥,
O.
N.
Inevatkina,
"Periodizatsiya
i
etapy
razvitiya
vodosnabzheniya
Afrasiaba"
(Periods
and
stages
of
the
development
of
the
water-supply
of
Afrasiab),
Istoriya
Material'no¥
Kul'tury
Uzbekistana
30,
Samarkand,
1999,
pp.
96-103.
E.
Kageyama,
"A
Chinese
Way
of
Depicting
Foreign
Delegates
Discerned
in
the
Painting
of
Afrasiab,"
in
Ph.
Huyse,
ed.,
Iran:
Questions
et
connaissances.
Actes
du
IVe
congreàs
europe‚en
des
e‚tudes
iraniennes.
Paris,
6-10
Septembre
1999,
vol.
I:
Etudes
sur
l'Iran
ancien,
Paris,
2002,
pp.
309-23.
Yu.
Karev,
"Un
palais
islamique
du
VIIIe
sieàcle
aà
Samarkand,"
Studia
Iranica
29,
2000,
pp.
273-96.
E.
de
La
Vaissieàre,
Histoire
des
marchands
sogdiens,
Paris,
2002.
B.
Lyonnet,
"Les
Grecs,
les
nomades
et
l'inde‚pendance
de
la
Sogdiane,
d'apreàs
l'occupation
compare‚e
d'Aï
Khanoum
et
de
Marakanda
au
cours
des
derniers
sieàcles
avant
notre
eàre,"
Bulletin
of
the
Asia
Institute
12,
1998,
pp.
141-59.
B.
Marshak,
"Le
programme
iconographique
des
peintures
de
la
'Salle
des
ambassadeurs'
aà
Afrasiab
(Samarkand),"
Arts
Asiatiques
49,
1994,
pp.
5-20.
N.
B.
Nemtseva
(with
notes
by
M.
Rogers),
"The
origins
and
architectural
development
of
the
Shah-i
zinde,"
Iran
15,
1977,
pp.
51-73.
C.
Rapin,
"Fortifications
helle‚nistiques
de
Samarcande
(Samarkand-Afrasiab),"
Topoi
4,
1994,
pp.
547-65.
G.
V.
Shishkina,
Remeslennaya
produktsiya
srednevekovogo
Sogda
(The
artisanal
production
of
medieval
Soghd),
Tashkent,
1986.
Idem,
"Ancient
Samarkand:
Capital
of
Soghd,"
Bulletin
of
the
Asia
Institute
8,
1994
[1996],
pp.
81-99.
G.
V.
Shishkina,
L.
V.
Pavchinskaja,
Terres
secreàtes
de
Samarcande.
Ce‚ramiques
du
VIIIe
au
XIIIe
sieàcle,
Paris,
1992.
Studies
based
mainly
on
historical
sources.
A.
M.
Belenitski¥,
I.
B.
Bentovich,
O.
G.
Bol'shakov,
Srednevevovy¥
gorod
Sredne¥
Azii
(The
medieval
town
in
Central
Asia),
Leningrad,
1973
(esp.
pp.
143-62,
219-32,
266).
Dzh.
Z.
Buniyatov,
T.
B.
Gasanov,
"Dva
samarkandskikh
vakfa
serediny
XI
v."
(Two
waqf
documents
from
Samarkand,
mid
11th
century),
Vostochnoe
istoricheskoe
istochnikovedenie
i
spetsial'nye
istoricheskie
distsipliny
II,
Moscow,
1994,
pp.
39-63.
Yu.
Karev,
"La
politique
d'Ab@u
Muslim
dans
le
M@awar@a'annahr.
Nouvelles
donne‚es
textuelles
et
arche‚ologiques,"
Der
Islam
79,
2002,
pp.
1-46.
M.
Khadr
(with
an
introduction
by
Claude
Cahen),
"Deux
actes
de
waqf
d'un
qara¿®nide
d'Asie
centrale,"
JA
255,
1967,
pp.
305-34.
B.
Manz,
The
Rise
and
Rule
of
Tamerlane,
Cambridge,
1989.
J.
Paul,
"The
histories
of
Samarqand,"
Studia
Iranica
22,
1993,
pp.
69-92.
P.
Pelliot,
"Une
ville
musulmane
dans
la
Chine
du
Nord
sous
les
Mongols,"
JA
211,
1927,
pp.
261-79.
(Frantz
Grenet)
|