Cities and social order in Sasanian Iran--the archaeological potential.

Cities and social order in Sasanian Iran--the archaeological potential. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Introduction Research focusing on the history and nature of Iranian citiesduring the Sasanian period, AD 224-651, is still in its infancy (Huff1986: 177). Indeed, much of our knowledge base is drawn from acombination of historical traditions and the results of limitedarchaeological excavations. Although many of the former were preservedwithin later Islamic texts (Curtis 2000: 84-90), they provideinsufficient detail as to social and spatial order. Some sources recordonly the names of the cities and their founders (Tafazzoli 1987: 332),whilst others, translated into Arabic and Persian, describe only thesocial dimensions and administrative affairs of society during theSasanian period. It may be argued, however, that elements of theserecords--namely the Karnamak-iArtaxshir-i Pabakan, Shahrhaye Iran or'The Iranian Cities', Pahlavi Canons, Madigan Hizardudistan,Majmoueye (collection of) Bakhtishoue, Letter of Tansar, History ofKarkh Beyt Slough, Rouydad-nameh (adventure letters of)Adiabeneh--contain relevant details allowing us to reconstruct elementsof Sasanian social organisation. These details may be further combinedwith extant Sasanian inscriptions to shed light on the archaeologicallacuna (Sarfaraz 1987: 20). The general aim of the present paper is tocompare the characteristics of Sasanian cities, as knownarchaeologically, with the social organisation implied by epigraphicaland textual evidence. Sasanian social structure In view of the documentary sources, there can be little doubt thatSasanian society was broadly hierarchical (Table 1). Beneath the king ofkings at the top of the pyramid, the upper class consisted of noblesdivided into four groups. The highest group comprised kings of clientstates who recognised the overlordship of the Sasanian royal family. Asthey were frequently rulers of independent or remote regions, the titleof king was used for most of them (Karimian 2008: 101). The inscriptionof Kaba-yi Zardusht in Fars province, for example, lists the presence offour kings from the east of Iran at Ardashir I's court (Sprengling1953: 18). Tansar's letter refers to the rulers of the westernregion of Khwarazm and Kabul within this group of client kings or shahs(Minuvi 1977: 956). Due to the existence of these regional kings, theSasanian kings called themselves Shahan Shah, or king of kings, becausesuch a great number of rulers under them had a kingly title. Also withinthe first class of society but below the kings were princes, orWispuhragan, who were the heads of tribes. The third group of the firstclass included the great menor Wuzurgan, who are mentioned, for example,in the inscription of Paikuli in Iraq (Lukonin trans. 1993: 193, 681).Christensen believes that these great men (Wuzurgan) were the seniorofficials and representatives of the government (Christensen trans.1991: 168). The final group of the first class are, perhaps incorrectly,titled 'liberals' (Azatan). These individuals ruled over smallregions on behalf of the government and established links between thevillagers and central government (Karimian 2008:101). The clergy and secretaries were the second group of Iranian peopleduring the Sasanian age. The head of clergy was the Magupat Magupatan,who enjoyed the same rank as a prophet (Mas'udi 1970: 97). He wasthe guardian of religion and held the highest judicial position(Khwarazmi 1993:112). His position is noted as the highest in theKarnamak-iArtaxshir-i Pabakanand and Ivanow believed that the holder ofthis post had achieved the highest social position after the king by theend of the Sasanian period (Ivanow 1979: 161). Because of thisinfluence, many Sasanian kings tried to reduce the position of clergy(Pigulevskaia trans. 1988 (1958): 79). They were divided into twogroups, the Magupatan (Mobad) and the Herbadan (Karimian 2008: 105).Kardir, the Zoroastrian cleric whose portrait is carved in aninscription at Naqsh-i Rajab beside the Sasanian king, mentions Magupatand Herbad as separate titles (Frye trans. 1976: 193). Judgement,religious teachings, and supervision over the performance of religiousduties were the responsibility of Magupats, whilst Herbads guarded theholy fire (Khwarazmi 1993:112)--the latter holding a lower rank(Mas'udi 1970: 97; Tabari 1983b: 626). The clergy were alsosubdivided into judges, scholars, religious authorities and teachers(Christensen trans. 1991:151). Secretaries or officials involved incourt affairs formed the second group of the second class of Sasaniansociety. The court system of the Sasanian age was a vast, precise andvery complex one, and established unity in the country by gatheringexact information about the condition of the country, collecting taxesand dispensing justice (Diakonov 1967: 425; Tafazzoli 1992: 235;Zarrinkub 1992: 502). These people are understood to have acted aspoliticians (Christensen trans. 1991: 198) with the Iran Dabireh orIranian high-ranking writers at the top of this class (Diakonov 1967:422). The Shah Dabireh, who held the highest position in this group, wasthe head of the office of the Sasanian king (Ivanow 1979: 161). The third class of people in Sasanian society was composed ofmilitary officials and comprised two sections, the cavalry and theinfantry. The cavalry was further subdivided into heavy and lightcavalry, the former manned by Iranian nobles and the latter by lessernobles and the children of the rulers of states (Zarrinkub 1992:501).The infantry comprised villagers, who served the army on a compulsorybasis (Tabari 1983b: 649; Christensen trans. 1991: 289). The commanderof the army was named the Sepahbod (Diakonov 1967: 426) and by assigningfour Sepahbod in the four quarters of the country, the Sasanian kingsdistributed military power (Dinawari 1965: 96). The wealth producers were the fourth group of Iranian people duringthe Sasanian age and included the majority of the population of thecountry and formed the main sources of national wealth and also ofgovernment income (Zarrinkub 1992: 503). This class included threelayers of craftsmen, businessmen and farmers. Businessmen usually livedin the suburbs or in certain parts of the city and were part of aspecific guild or organisation (Shahzadi 1949: 80) and were regarded asimportant sources of national wealth through their ability to transferproducts between Iranian cities as well as abroad (Shahzadi 1949: 80;Mosaheb 1995: 342). Craftsmen also conducted activities in certain partsof the suburb or were allocated part of a bazaar. Agricultural producerslike farmers and gardeners lived in the suburbs of cities or villagesand produced agricultural products or bred animals (Tabari 1983b: 703).As the rate of activity and population increased, the cities of Irangenerally became known for specific kinds of trade, agriculture orindustrial activities (Pigulevskaia trans. 1993: 323). For example,Shoushtar and Ahwaz were among the centres for the textile industry inKhuzistan province in south-west Iran (Ghirshman trans. 2007: 410). Before discussing the second main source of evidence, the physicalremains of the cities themselves, mention must also be made of the classof Ayaran or stalwarts, well known for their manliness and generosity.Identified as followers of Mani, they defended the oppressed fromoppressors and claimed equality for all people and the removal of classdiscrimination (Nafisi 1988: 130). They had independent fire-temples andtheir most important fire-temple was at Rivand near Sabzevar (Khorasanprovince) and was known as Azar Barzinmehr (Pigulevskaia trans. 1993:384). Their leaders were selected from the class of nobility and wereassigned, directly by the king, with a responsibility to collect taxes(Ivanow 1979: 162; Pigulevskaia trans. 1988 (1958): 81). Rulers and cities The relative importance of cities during the Sasanian period waspartially the result of the state's expansionist attempts in thelast centuries BC. Urbanisation appears to have had a specific positionin the activities of the first Sasanian ruler, Ardashir (Karimian 2008:541; Hidayat 1963: 186-98). Indeed, whilst Christensen (1944: 96)mentions six cities founded by Ardashir I based on the writings of Ibnal-Muqaffa (d. AD 757), Tabari recorded a further eight includingArdashir-Khwarra or Shahr-e Gour, Raro Ardashir, Rive Ardashir, HormuzArdashir or Sough al-Ahvaz, Beh Ardashir or Cteisphon, Estabaz Ardashir,Pasa Ardashir and Boud Ardashir (Tabari 1983b: 819-20). This traditionof founding, and encouraging cities, was also shared by a number ofArdashir's successors, namely Shapur I (r. AD 241-271) and ShapurII (r. AD 271-309), who established the great cities of Bishapur,Nishapur, Jundishapur and Ivan-i Karkha (Huff 1986: 178). Sasaniancities also acted as a focus for external, as well as internal policy.For example, Shapur I attempted to strengthen the borders of his stateby successfully annexing Kharazm or Touran, a large province in thenorth-east of Iran. Once annexed, he ordered the establishment of a cityon the site where Touran's ruler, Pahle Chek, had been killed(Uryan 1982: 560; Tafazzoli 1987: 339). The new city, Nishapur, was thusa symbol of Shapur's personal victory as well as physicallyensuring the security of the northern parts of Iran. Once conflict withRome had been re-established by Shapur, a number of scholars haveidentified an acceleration of urban development fuelled by the presenceof Roman captives who were used to renovate dams and build cities(Tabari 1983b: 828). On the death of Shapur I in AD 272, social change began togradually occur in Iranian society, perhaps representing a rebellion ofordinary people against the more privileged classes (Tabari 1983a: 384).This social movement, known as the Mazdakiyan rebellion, motivatedvillagers and farmers against the salesmen, tradesmen and craftsmen wholived in the cities and utilised specific advantages over the former.Moreover, urban dwellers began to use their wealth to purchase land fromthe aristocracy and, according to the author of Nameye Tansar,'were dispersed in cites to steal, excite sedition and do evildeeds' (Minuvi 1975: 65). Although one of the duties of theSasanian kings was to direct people to do their own jobs and preventsocial mobility, it was not until the reign of Khusro I (r. AD 531-579)that the Sasanian rulers were determined to suppress the movement(Tafazzoli 1975: 48). At the end of that chaotic period, cities wereagain on the agenda of Sasanian kings. But despite a brief accelerationof urban building activities from that period onwards, their effortswere inferior when compared to the urban activities of the first age ofthe Sasanians. The archaeology of cities Archaeologists and experts of the history of urban forms in Iranhave differentiated a number of categories of extant Sasanian citiesbased on data from aerial photographs, maps and surface surveying. Thesevary considerably and some, such as Pope (Pope & Ackerman 1938:1391-410), classified them on the basis of plans, whilst others, such asVarjavand (1987: 1-46) and Pigulevskaia (trans. 1993), classified themaccording to geographical location and date of construction. A thirdclassification, as supported by Huff (1986: 17692) and Sarfaraz (1987:22-72), is to divide them into ruined (deserted) and active (live)cities. Active cities refers to cities which, despite frequentdestruction of building units and replacement of their districts, maystill be identified with their original Sasanian name and are stillinhabited. Pope's classification into circular and rectangularplans is adopted for the present study. He identified the former ascopies of earlier Parthian urban plans: 'Although the exact plans of a number of Sasanian cities are unknown, almost no research on this problem has yet been undertaken. The oval, almost circular layout of Cteisphon dates from the Parthian period, and that this form of plan, which seems to have been typical of Eastern cities, was current in the Parthian period is shown by the layout of Hatra and Darabgerd' (Pope & Ackerman 1938: 575). [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] As noted in the introduction to this paper, archaeologicalactivities researching the nature of cities in the Sasanian age aretare, and have only been conducted sporadically (Huff 1986: 177). Theremainder of this paper will suggest, as a promising research objective,the relationship between documented social and economic structures andthe spatial layout of cities. My three case studies, selected on thebasis of available evidence, are Firuzabad, Bishapur and Istakhr, onecircular and two rectangular in plan. The circular city of Firuzabad (Figure 1) Firuzabad, ancient Gour, was built by Ardashir and was the capitalof his government in AD 224-241 (Uryan 1982: 620). Islamic historiansconfirm that its name was changed to Firuzabad in the tenth century onthe order of Adud al-Daula, the Dailamite king (r. AD 933-1062) (LeStrange trans. 1958 (1905): 276). Historical accounts refer to itsfortifications, as illustrated by the Hudud al-alam (c. AD 983) whichrecords that 'Gour is a thriving and fertile city. Ardashir foundedit and he had constructed a fortification round it' (Barthold 1929(1903): 215). More detail was provided, however, by Istakhri (d. AD961), who stated that the city had clay walls, four main gates and abuilding known as the Tirbal, or government installation, in the centreof the city (Figure 2). He also recorded that the latter was built byArdashir to overlook all villages of the region (Istakhri 1961:110) andthat 'all residential zones were located within the walls' ofthe city (Istakhri 1961: 99). Huff believes that the city was desertedfrom AD 15 or 16, and its population was transferred to the presentFiruzabad for unknown reasons (Huff 1987: 97). First planned by Flanden in 1843, and augmented by Stein in 1936and Ghirshman in 1947, the most accurate survey was carried out by theGeneral Office of Archaeological Activities of Iran in 1972 and thecorroboration between the site plans and historical texts is notable.Firuzabad was circular in shape with a diameter of 2km and wassubdivided into 20 sections by concentric and radial streets. This planwas further extended over the plain with an outer wall with a diameterof 7.5km. The geometrical precision of the plan was the symbol of amajor development in this formerly uncultivated area. Archaeologicalsurvey has discovered an aqueduct and a system of canals and tunnels(Kiani 1995: 59). The main architectural monuments of the city weresurrounded by a circular sun-dried brick wall facing a 55m wide ditch,which was intersected by the four great gates mentioned above. The fourgates served two main streets which thus divided the city into fourquadrants. Each quadrant was further divided into five, forming awheel-like plan with 20 equal shapes (Huff 1986: 178). Investigations ofthe city's residential areas suggest the presence of low-levelbuildings with considerable spaces between them (Huff 1987: 78). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] Built in brick or rubble stone, and with courts and gardens, theywere aligned alongside the radial streets. This design covered theentire city with the exception of the central disc, which had a diameterof 450m (Huff 1987: 79). Separated by a thick wall, it was reached byfour gates in the direction of the main pivots of the city. It isthought that this section was reserved for administrative andgovernmental activities as may be observed from the monumental structurepresent there. The Tirbal, or governor's seat, is located at thecrossroads of the city's centre and is made of various stones andchalk mortar (Figure 2). Standing 30m high, its exact function and shapeare still uncertain. Dieulafoy, for example, compared it to the minaretof the mosque of Samarra in Iraq (1884: 79), whilst Herzfeld believedthat it was the central support for a much larger building (1941: 255).Regardless of its uncertain nature, it is possible to agree with Samithat 'the main reason for the establishment of this tower was tocreate a visual link with the city and its surrounding area'(1976a: 39) and with Sarfaraz that 'this monument was used fordrawing the comprehensive map of the city, controlling the dailyactivities of people and traversing the surrounding plains'(Sarfaraz 1987: 28). The function of the circular shape of the city isas controversial as that of its central building and Huff has arguedthat the former represented an ideological dimension. Without advocatingthe recognition of a dominant ideology over the establishment of thecity, he suggested that 'the concentric map is to show a globalkingdom, in order to glorify the concentric and absolute governance inthe country and the world' (Huff 1987: 97). Surface surveys (Sarai 1976b: 1-11) suggest that occupation was notuniform within the site and that there was a very great differencebetween those areas equipped with simple designs and one storey houseson the one hand and the central monuments on the other. The buildingsoutside the inner city decrease in congestion and desirability ofbuilding materials in proportion to their distance from the centre,perhaps representing the sector for agriculture and animal husbandry.With the city's four gates representing the four cardinaldirections, it may be suggested that Huff's model (Huff 1987: 97)in which Firuzabad represented a microcosm of kingdom and universe,seems very possible. The rectangular city of Bishapur (Figure 3) Bishapur represents one of the most fully investigated Sasaniancities and may be placed within the category of rectangular urban form.It was located close to the royal road which linked Istakhr andFiruzabad with Ctesiphon and in contrast to Firuzabad, had a rectangulargrid plan measuring 1.5 x 0.8km. Stretched along the south-west bank ofa river, its southeastern and south-western sides were protected bywalls and ditches. It was built by Shapur I (r. AD 241-272) and calledVeh Shapur--'the Beauty of Shapur'. The text also divides Iraninto four cardinal regions and includes Bishapur in the southernmost(Tafazzoli 1987: 336). That the city was founded by Shapur I issupported by Istakhri (c. AD 951), whilst Mustawfi added in c. AD 1319that 'Bishapur, was among the great cities of Sasanian age whichwas built by Shapur I.... The name of the city was originally BehShapur, which gradually became Bishapur' (Mustawfi 1957:151). Whilethe cited sources identify its founder, none describe the city'slayout. Surface survey and excavation have successfully identified the maincity plan, augmented by the location of a number of major buildings inits north-west quarter. Ghirshman excavated the site between 1935 and1940 and work at the site was resumed in 1968 by Sarfaraz who exposed160m of the city's northern wall (Figure 4). The wall was fortifiedwith bastions spaced at 0.40m intervals and each bastion measured 7.3min diameter (Sarfaraz 1993: 10-11). Whilst the northern side of the citywas protected by the Shapur River and the eastern side by a fortifiedhill, the south and west were marked by a deep ditch. Thesefortifications formed a rectangular plan subdivided into rectangularblocks by a cardinal grid of streets (Sarfaraz 1987: 40). The majorcrossroads at the centre of the city was marked by the presence of twocolumns, erected in honour of Shapur I, the founder of the city, by ahigh ranking agent (Ghirshman trans. 1999 (1971): 49-50, 270-1) (Figure5). The north-east quarter of the city was found by Ghirshman to beoccupied by monumental buildings, namely the palace of Shapur and atemple (Ghirshman 1962: 175). The former was a square-shaped complexcentred on a massive cruciform hall once spanned by a dome, 22m indiameter and decorated with mosaics and plaster (Ghirshman trans. 1999(1971): 270) (Figure 6). The latter, a square subterranean complex builtof dressed stones has been identified as a temple dedicated to thegoddess of water, Anahita (Sarfaraz 1995: 27). Unfortunately, othersectors of the city have not been excavated and as yet there istherefore little knowledge of the city's residential and commercialframework. [FIGURE 3 OMITTED] [FIGURE 4 OMITTED] The rectangular city of Istakhr Istakhr, as a rectangular grid plan measuring 1.2 x 0.8km and oneof the largest and most populated cities of pre-Islamic Iran (Yarshater1983: 402), is located 7km north of Persepolis and was occupied throughAchaemenid, Parthian and Sasanian rule (Sellwood 1983: 302). Serving asan administrative and religious centre from Achaemenid times, under theSasanians the latter function was especially important as it housed thedynasty's ritual fire, Anahid-ardashir, and was the ideologicalheart of the empire. The city also functioned as a major crossroads,communicating with the coast and the adjoining provinces (Brunner 1983:751). The cause and the date of the evacuation of the city by itsinhabitants and its destruction are not clear, but Bosworth (1983: 609)refers to immigrants from Istakhr who were living in the north-easternArabian Peninsula, in particular Bahrain, during the Early Islamicperiod. Therefore it can be assumed that the inhabitants of the city,either compulsorily or voluntarily, left the city in the Early Islamiccenturies. [FIGURE 5 OMITTED] Herzfeld was the first archaeologist to draw attention to Istakhrin 1932 and he was followed by Schmidt (Kiani 1995: 25). Theirexcavations exposed material dating to the Early Islamic period and itwas apparent that many of the courtyard-centred buildings wereconstructed of re-used materials from earlier Achaemenid and Sasanianbuildings (Tajvidi 1976: 186). Sami surveyed the city in 1975 andsuggested that the city was originally planned with four cardinal gatesand divided into a governmental citadel and residential zones (Sami1975: 10) (Figure 7). In describing these zones he mentioned that therewere separate defensive walls around them and the defensive system ofthe governmental citadel was completed with a vast ditch, which was duground its defensive wall (Sami 1963: 317). In addition to describing thestatus of the city, he mentioned that the intact and shattered stones,which were pieces of pillars and other part of buildings, were scatteredall over the city. He also mentions that the situation of the city is insuch a way to explain its desolation (disorder) in the last centuries ofits life. [FIGURE 6 OMITTED] [FIGURE 7 OMITTED] Conclusion Whilst cities played important centralising and military rolesduring the Sasanian period, it is also clear that Sasanian urban spaceappears to mirror Sasanian social order, as most examples conform to arigid circular or rectangular plan, complete with multiple subdivisions(Karimian 2003). Such a pattern is clearly illustrated by the circularplan of Firuzabad, a city with a diameter of 7.5km surrounding an innerwall with a diameter of 2km, both centred on a monumental tower whichstands at the exact centre of the complex (Kiani 1995: 59). Ananalogous, though rectangular plan is found at Bishapur and Ishtakr,cities whose administrative zones are physically, as well as socially,separated. Huff has also attempted to identify a symbolic role for theurban form at Firuzabad by suggesting that it also represents both thekingdom and the universe, so that the ruler controlled all three (city,kingdom and universe) from the central point (1987: 97). One may alsomake additional links in that the Sasanian kingdom was divided into fourcardinal regions (Gnoli 1985: 265-270; Tafazzoli 1987: 336; but seeGignoux 1984: 555-72), its people into four groups (Pour Davoud 1979:35), and most Sasanian cities into four quarters by its cardinal roads(Simpson 2008: 71). Such a microcosm would thus work at two levels andthe governor would represent the king and his city the kingdom, whilstthe king would represent the great god and his kingdom the universe.Furthermore, by founding and ruling the city, the king would be ensuringthat his own kingdom (and universe) was stable and successful. The archaeological potential of these sites for the elucidation ofsocial structure is clearly very great. It would not necessarily requireyears of excavation, since the power of modern remote mappingmethodology could lead an inquiry in which targeted excavation mightfollow. Meanwhile it might be observed that the Sasanian period in Iranhas left us some of the richest archaeological sources for the furtherstudy of urbanism. Received: 7 July 2008; Accepted: 3 November 2008; Revised: 4January 2010 References Editorial note: titles in square brackets indicate Englishparaphrases of Iranian publications. BARTHOLD, V.V. (trans. 1929) 1903. An historical geography of Iran.Translated into Persian by H. Sardadvar. Tehran: Tahouri Library Press. BOSWORTH, C.E. 1983. Iran and the Arabs before Islam, in E.Yarshater (ed.) The Cambridge history of Iran. Volume 3: The SeleucidParthian and Sasanian periods: 593-613. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. BRUNNER, Ch. 1983. Geographical and administrative division, in E.Yarshater (ed.) The Cambridge history of Iran. Volume 3: The SeleucidParthian and Sasanian periods: 747-78. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. CHRISTENSEN, A. 1944. L'Iran sous les Sassanides. Secondedition. Translated into Persian by E Varjavand. Tehran: Payam Press. --(trans. 1991). Mardom va Hokoomat Dar Asr-e Sasanian [Theposition of people and government in the Sassanid period]. Translatedinto Persian by M. Minuvi. Tehran: Investigation Centre of HumanSciences CURTIS, J. 2000. Ancient Persia. Second edition. London: BritishMuseum Press. DIAKONOV, I.M. 1967. [History of ancient Iran]. Translated intoPersian by R. Arbab. Tehran: Institute of Book Publishing Press. DIEULAFOY, M.A. 1884. L'Art antique de la Perse: Achemenides,Parthes, Sassanides. Volume 5: Monuments parthes et sassanides. Paris:Librairie centrale d'architecture. Translated into Persian by B.Farahvashi. Tehran: Tehran University Press. DINAWARI, A.H. 1965. Al-Akhbar al-Tiwal. Translated into Persian byDamghani. Tehran: Ney Press. FRYE, R.N. (trans. 1976). [The middle Persian inscription at SarMashhad]. Translated into Persian. Shiraz: Asia Institute of PahlaviUniversity. GHIRSHMAN, R. 1962. Persian art: the Parthian and Sassaniandynasties, 249 BC-AD 651. New York: Golden Press. GHIRSHMAN, R. with T. GHIRSHMAN & A. HARDY (trans. 1999) 1971.Bichapour. Volumes 1 & 2 (Musee du Louvre, Departement desAntiquites orientales, Serie archeologique 6). Translated into Farsi byA. Karimi. Tehran: Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation. GHIRSHMAN, R. (trans. 2007). Iran from the earliest times to theIslamic conquest. Translated into Farsi by M. Moeein. Tehran: NegahPress GIGNOUX, Ph. 1984. Les quatre regions administratives del'Iran sasanide et la symboliques des nombres trois et quatre.Annali dell 'Istituto Universitario Orientale eli Napoli 44:555-72. GNOLI, G. 1985. The quadripartition of the Sassnian Empire. Eastand West 35: 265-70. HERZFELD, E. 1941. Iran in the ancient East. London; New York:Oxford University Press. HIDAYAT, S. 1963. Karnamak-i Artaxshir-i Pabakan [The Deed Book ofArdashir I]. Tehran: Amir Kabir Co. Press. HUFF, D. 1986. Shahrhay Sasani [Sasanian cities], in M.Y. Kiani(ed.) A general study on urbanisation and urban planning in Iran:176-200. Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance of Iran. --1987. Firuzabad, in M.Y. Kiani (ed.) Iranian cities: 75-117.Translated into Persian by K.O. Afsar. Tehran: Ministry of IslamicGuidance of Iran. Istakhri, I. 1961. Kitab al-Masalik va-l-Mamalik. Edited from anoriginal manuscript by H. Gharbal. Tehran: Ministry of Guidance. IVANOW. W, 1979. [Ancient Iran]. Translated into Persian by Eizadi& Tahvili. Tehran: Donyay Ketab Press. KARIMIAN, H. 2003. Intentionality and meaning in the similar layoutof Sasanian cities. Paper presented to the 10th IranianResearcher's Seminar in Europe (IRSE), 28 June 2003, University ofCentral England (UCE), Birmingham, UK. --2008. Iranian society in the Sasanian period, in D. Kennet &P. Luft (ed.) Current research in Sasanian archaeology, art and history(British Archaeological Reports International Series 1810): 99-107.Oxford: Archaeopress. KIANI, M.Y. 1986. Parthian cities, in M.Y. Kiani (ed.)A generalstudy on urbanisation and urban planning in Iran: 105-25. Tehran:Iranian Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. --1995. A general survey of Iranian capitals before the Islamicperiod, in M.Y. Kiani (ed.) Iranian capitals: 22-45. Tehran: IranianCultural Heritage Organisation. KHWARAZMI, A.A. 1993. Mafatih al-ulum. Translated into Persian byKhadive Jam. Tehran: Elmi Farhangi Co. Press. LE STRANGE, G. (trans. 1958) 1905. The lands of the easternCaliphate: Mesopotamia, Persia and central Asia from the Moslem conquestto the time of Timur. Translated into Persian by M. Irfan. Tehran:Scientific & Cultural Publication Company. LUKONIN, V.G. (trans. 1993) 1969. [Sasanid civilisation].Translated into Persian by E. Reza. Teheran: Elmi Farhangi Co. Press. MAS'UDI, A.I.H. 1970. Kitab al--Tanbih va-l-Ashraf Translatedinto Persian by A. Payandeh. Tehran: Bongahe Tarjome va Nashre Ketab. MEHRYAR, M. 1999. A background of investigations and archaeologicalexcavations in Bishapur, in [The history of Iranian architecture andurbanism 2] (a collection of papers presented in the Second Congress ofHistory of Iranian Architecture and Urbanism, 3-7 March 1999): 11-71.Tehran: Cultural Heritage Organisation of Iran. MINUVI, M. 1977. [Tansar's letter]. Tehran: Khwarazmi Co.Press. --(ed.) 1975. Nameye Tansar [The letter of Tansar]. Tehran: FarhangFoundation Press. MOSAHEB, M. 1995. Persian encyclopaedia of Iran, Volume 3. Tehran. MUSTAWFI, H.-A. 1957. Nuzhatal-Qulub. Edited from an originalmanuscript by G. Le Strange. Translated into Persian & published in1915 by Armaghan Co. Second edition by M. Dabirsaghi. Tehran: TahouriLibrary Press. NAFISI, S. 1988. [History of Iranian civilisation in the Sasanidage]. Tehran: Tehran University. PIGULEVSKALA, N.V. (trans. 1988) 1958. [History of Iran fromancient times until the end of 18th CE.] Translated into Persian byKeshavarz. Tehran: Payam Press. --(trans. 1993). [Iranian cities in the Parthian and Sasanid age].Translated into Persian by Inayat ullah Rida, Tehran: Scientific andCultural Publication Company. POPE, A.U. & P. ACKERMAN (ed.) 1938. A survey of Persian artfrom prehistoric times to the present, Volume 1:pre-Achaemenid,Achaemenid, Parthian and Sasanian periods period. London; New York:Oxford University Press. POUR DAVOUD, I. 1979. [Yasns: second part]. Tehran: Iran ShenasiPress. SAMI, A. 1963. Sasanidc ivilisation, Volume 1. Shiraz: MousaviPress. --1975. The ruins of the historical city of Istakhr. Journal ofHonar va Mardom [Art and People] 158: 1-12. --1976a. Iranian architecture in the Sasanid period. Journal ofHonar Va Mardom [Art and People] 74: 24-42 --1976b. The ancient city of Gour. Journal of Honar Va Mardom [Artand People]. 169-70:1-11 SARFARAZ, A.A. 1978. [Guide book for ancient monuments ofBishapur]. Shiraz: Mostafavi Press. --1987. Bishapur, in M.Y. Kiani (ed.) [Iranian cities]: 22-75.Tehran: Ministry of Islamic Guidance of Iran. --1993. [Monograph of the archaeological congress of Bishapur].Tehran: University of Tehran. --1995. The temple of Anahita, in The history of Iranianarchitecture and urbanism (a collection of papers presented in the FirstCongress of History of Iranian Architecture and Urbanism, February1994): 23-33. Tehran: Cultural Heritage Organisation of Iran. SELLWOOD, D. 1983. Minor states in southern Iran, in E. Yarshater(ed.) The Cambridge history of Iran. Volume 3: The Seleucid Parthian andSasanian periods: 299-322. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SHAHZADI, R. 1949. [One thousand articles of law from Sasanid civillaw]. Tehran: Faravahar Press. SHEPHERD, D. 1983. Sasanian art, in E. Yarshater (ed.) TheCambridge history of Iran. Volume 3: The Seleucid Parthian and Sasanianperiods: 1055-113. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SIMPSON, ST. J. 2008. Suburb or slum? Excavation at Marv(Turkistan) and observations on stratigraphy, refuse and materialculture in a Sasanian city, in D. Kennet & P. Luft (ed.) Currentresearch in Sasanian archaeology, art and history. Proceedings of aconference held at Durham University 3-4 November 2001 (BritishArchaeological Reports International Series 1810): 65-78. Oxford:Archaeopress. SPRENGLING, M. 1953. Third century Iran, Sapor and Kartir. Chicago(IL): Oriental Institute, University of Chicago. TABARI, M.J. 1983a. Tarikh al-Rusul va-l-Muluk [History of theprophets and governors], Volume 2. Translated into Persian by Payandeh.Tehran: Iranian Culture Foundation. --1983b. Tarikh al-Rusul va-l-Muluk [History of the prophets andgovernors], Volume 5. Translated into Persian by Payandeh. Tehran:Iranian Culture Foundation. TAFAZZOLI, A. 1975. Minooy-e Kherad. Translated from the Pahlavimanuscript into contemporary Persian. Tehran: Bongah Farhang Press. --1987. [Iranian cities: a translation from a Pahlavi manuscriptrelating to the Sasanid period], in M.Y. Kiani (ed.) [Iranian cities]:332-50. Tehran: Iranian Ministry of Islamic Guidance. --1992. Dabir in pre-Islamic Iran. Encyclopaedia Iranica 6:535-38 TAJVIDI, A.A. 1976. [New knowledge about art and archaeology of theAchaemenid era based on five years excavations in Persepolis]. Tehran:Iranian Ministry of Culture & Art. URYAN, S. 1982. Shahrhaye Iran [Iranian cities]. (A translationfrom a manuscript of Sasanid booklet 5). Tehran: Chista Press. VARJAVAND, P. 1987. Urbanism and urbanity in Iran, in M.Y. Kiani(ed.) Iranian cities: 1-43. Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. YARSHATER, E. 1983.Iranian national history, in E. Yarshater (ed.) The Cambridge history of Iran. Volume 3: TheSeleucid Parthian and Sasanian periods: 359-481. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. ZARRINKUB, A.H. 1992. [The history of the Iranian people, Volume1]. Tehran: Amir Kabir Co. Press. Hassan Karimian, Department of Archaeology, University of Tehran,Enghelab Street, Tehran, Iran (Email: hkarimi@ut.ac.ir)Table 1. The class system in the Sasanian period. DependentClass Main class sub-classes1 Nobles Sovereign Princes, Liberals2 Clergy and Magupatan Herbadan Secretari- Secretariats, Writers ats of judicial orders, Writers of contract and lease contracts, Historians, Physicians, Astronomers3 Military The heavy cavalry, The men light cavalry, Infantry4 Wealth Businessmen, producers Craftsmen, Farmers & peasants Position in socialClass structure Main functions1 Kings of states, Heads of Maintaining and tribes, Governmental supporting the representatives and authority of Sasanian inspectors, Rulers of king over the country, small regions Maintaining order and dominance of central government, Preparing report of situation of states and solving problems, Establishing links between people and rulers of states2 Highest judicial posts Judgement, Protect and religious teaching, religion, Teaching Religious and religious affairs, maintain fire, Conducting Employees of ceremonies, Collecting governmental information and organisations at the recording them, centre of government Collecting taxes and and centre of registering financial government in states data, Writing and keeping orders of judicial courts, contracts, lease contracts, registration of country, Scientific teaching3 Iranian nobles, Children Control of borders and of rulers of states, sensitive installations, Villagers on military Confronting foreign service intrusions4 Well-to-do class (from Conducting trade affairs, ordinary people), Establishing centre for Middle class (from preparing and ordinary people), Low distributing goods, income class Industrial productions, Agricultural productions