Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T17:29:52.251Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Diffusion of the ‘Salles a Quatre Saillants’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

Michael Roaf
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1965 Roman Ghirshman drew attention to a particular element of Elamite architecture which he called the “salle à quatre saillants”: this is a rectangular room with four pilasters placed near the short walls and a large doorway in the middle of its long side, opening on to a courtyard. It must have served as the reception, audience and throne hall. Ghirshman identified this architectural form in successive Middle Elamite levels on the Royal City mound at Susa in houses belonging to officials of the Sukkalmahhu, and so it may reflect Royal Palace designs, as do the Neo-Assyrian Residences at Khorsabad. He has dated these levels from c. 1800 to c. 1300 B.C. He also noted its reappearance at Susa in the Palace of Darius. Here it is slightly modified: there are two “salles à quatre saillants” placed side by side with doorways piercing through them both (see also fig. 11). It would be possible to maintain that the double and single “salles à quatre saillants” are distinct but this has neither chronological nor geographical significance.

The eight centuries between these buildings cannot yet be filled with more Elamite examples of the “salle à quatre saillants” because very little Elamite architecture has been discovered. It does not appear in the funerary palaces at Choga Zanbil and has not been found on the Iranian plateau at this period. The Kassite palace at Dur-Kurigalzu shows no trace of it, and Geoffrey Turner in his recent study of Late Assyrian palace plans did not draw attention to this feature.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , Spring 1973 , pp. 83 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Ghirshman, R. “L'architecture Elamite et ses traditions” (Iranica Antigua 5 (1965), 93–102)Google Scholar.

2 Ibid., fig. 1—level A/XII, “now dated about 1400–1300 B.C.”; fig. 2 (here fig. 1)—level A/XIII, “contemporary with Ammiṣaduqa (1646–1626 B.C.)”; and fig. 3—level A/XIV, “eighteenth century B.C.”. For these datings, see Ghirshman, R. “The Elamite levels at Susa and their chronological significance” (AJA 74 (1970), 224)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I have redrawn all the figures in the present article; they are approximately at the scale of 1: 1000 except figs. 13 and 14. Fig. 1 is after Ghirshman, op. cit. (n. 1), 95, fig. 2, “Restored plan of the house of Attaru-Uktuh, Niveau A/XIII.”

3 Fig. 2 is after Girshman, op. cit., fig. 4. This plan is restored; for the evidence see de Mecquenem, R. “Contribution a l'étude du Palais Achéménide de Suse” Memoires de la Mission Archéologique en Iran 30 (1947), 8 f.Google Scholar, plan I. The existence of a doorway in the south wall of the complex is not certain. For the most recent plans of the Achaemenid Palace at Susa see Perrot, J. in “Survey of Excavations in Iran during 1970–71” (Iran 10 (1972), 182 f., fig. 1)Google Scholar.

4 Turner, G. “The state apartments of Late Assyrian palaces” (Iraq 32 (1970), 177–213)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See, however, ibid., 194 for “an additional chamber at the rear of the throne“ in “late seventh century palaces”.

5 Loud, G. and Altaian, C., Khorsabad II (OIP XL, 1938), 11Google Scholar.

6 Turner, op. cit., 181–194.

7 Loud and Altman, loc. cit.; Turner, op. cit., 181–2. For a possible exception, see below on the Town Wall Palace at Nimrud. Fig. 3 is after Loud and Altman, op. cit., Pl. 86 “the principal reception suite at Palace F, Khorsabad”. This arrangement of rooms is already seen in the Palace of the Rulers at Tell Asmar at the end of the third millennium B.C.: the Great Hall was probably a courtyard. Frankfort, H., Lloyd, S., and Jacobsen, Th. “The Gimilsin Temple and the Palace of the Rulers at Tell Asmar” (OIP XLIII, 1940), Pl. 1Google Scholar.

8 Layard, A. H. “Nineveh and Babylon” (1853), plan facing p. 67Google Scholar; followed by Paterson, A. “Assyrian sculptures, Palace of Sinacherib” (1915)Google Scholar.

9 Turner, op. cit., Plate XXXVII n.

10 Madhloum, T. “Excavations at Nineveh” (Sumer 23 (1967), 76–82 and Pl. IX)Google Scholar. Fig. 4 is taken from this publication. The scales on the plan are incorrect; a more accurate scale can be found by consulting the text.

11 It is even more questionable whether any of the less important reception suites in this palace should be classified as “salles à quatre saillants”. Possible candidates are the suites XXIX, XXX, XXXVIII, XXXIV; XXV, XXIV, XXVI; XLIV, XLIII, XLV; and LXVI, LXV might form part of one. Turner, op. cit., Plate XLVb, c; XXXIXf; XLg. See also footnote 17.

12 The excavations are directed by Dr. Amer Suleiman, and the results of the 1968 and 1969 seasons are published in Adab al-Rafidain 2 (1971), 16–51Google Scholar. I am indebted to Dr. Abdul Rashad, the Dean of the College of Arts, Mosul University, for giving me a copy of this article, and to Julian Baldick for help with the Arabic of this article. Fig. 5 is after Plan 1. The scales on the plan are incorrect; the scale which I have used is a compromise between the measurements in the text and the scale on plan 2.

13 The feature to the south-west is a drainage channel; according to Dr. Suleiman, it forms part of the Bīt-Rimki. For further details consult the Arabic text.

14 Cf. Turner, op. cit., Plate XLIVc.

15 Fig. 6 is taken from Barnett, R. D. and Falkner, M., “The sculptures of Tiglath-Pileser III (745–727 B.C.)” (1962), 21, fig. 5Google Scholar.

16 David Stronach has suggested to me that the side columns might be secondary, an idea which is supported by their irregular positions.

17 For a sensible reconstruction of the plan of this range of rooms see Turner, op. cit., Plate XLV d. It is perhaps worth bearing in mind the parallels which he has shown between the similar suites in Sennacherib's palace at Nineveh (rooms XXIX–XLI, XXV–XXVII), ibid., Plate XLVb, c. See above, footnote 11.

18 De Mecquenem, op. cit., 43.

19 Ghirshman, op. cit., 99–100.

20 De Mecquenem, op. cit., 43.

21 This is the situation at Eiwan-e Kerkha, and so this building cannot be included within the tradition of the “salle à quatre saillants”. Cf. Ghirshman, op. cit., 100–2.

22 Fig. 7 is after Meissner, B. and Opitz, D., “Studien zum Bît-Ḫîlani im Nordpalast des Assurbaniplis zu Ninive” (1940)Google Scholar, Taf. 1. Cf. Turner, op. cit., Plate XXXVIIIp. Turner's reconstruction of a stairwell is supported by the parallel with the Town Wall Palace at Nimrud, though this is not conclusive. It is unlikely that rooms G and H formed part of a “salle à quatre saillants”, ibid., Plate XLh.

23 Fig. 8 is after Mallowan, M. E. L., “Excavations at Nimrud (Kalhu), 1956” (Iraq 19 (1957), 21–25, and Plate X)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Aharoni, Y., “The ‘Persian fortress’ at Lachish—an Assyrian Palace?” (Yediot 31 (1967), 80–91)Google Scholar. I am grateful to Ruth Stronach for translating this article into English. For a contrary view, see Tufnell, O., Lachish III, “The Iron Age” (1953), [131–135Google Scholar; and Nylander, C. “Ionians in Pasargadae” (1970), 54–5Google Scholar, notes 127, 128 and 130, and references cited there. Fig. 9 is after R. Amiran, “Persian Achaemenid Impact on Palestine” (in A survey of Persian Art XIV, ed. A. U. Pope, Ch. 83, fig. 1082). This is apparently printed back to front, cf. ibid., fig. 1081; and Tufnell, op. cit., pl. 119.

25 As already pointed out by de Mecquenem, op. cit., 43.

26 Tufnell, op. cit., 131, and Pl. 120.

27 Moortgat, A., “The Art of Ancient Mesopotamia” (1969), 160Google Scholar. Fig. 10 is taken from fig. 116 in which the remains of the palace of Nabopolassar can be seen in the West Court, and have the same plan as the later design.

28 Woolley, C. L. and Mallowan, M. E. L., “The walls and not pilasters. Neo-Babylonian and Persian periods” (UE IX, 1962), Pl. 70Google Scholar, rooms 14, 17 and 20 and rooms 43, 44, and 47. The same unit is shown in the private houses, ibid., Pl. 71, House 2, rooms 4, 5, and 6; but House 7, rooms 4, 5 and 6 seems to indicate that these are walls and not pilasters.

29 Fig. 11 is after Perrot, J., “Mission de Suse” in “Survey of Excavations in Iran 1969–70” (Iran 9 (1971), fig. 2b)Google Scholar. I am grateful to Jean Perrot for allowing me to use the most recent Susa plans and for discussing things Susian with me.

30 This might be an argument against Elamite continuity after 640 B.C. at least in architecture. Cf. P. Amiet, “Eléments émaillés du décor architectural Néo-Elamite”, and Lambert, M., “Appendice Shutruk-Nahunte et Shutur-Nahunte” (Syria 44 (1967), 27–46 (esp. 43–5)Google Scholar; and 47–51. The similarity of the plans of the Annexe Court and the Susa Palace was noted by Andrae (Ar. Anz. (1923–4), 99).

31 Fig. 12 is after Schmidt, E. F., “Persepolis I” (OIP LXVIII, 1953), fig. 21Google Scholar. See also Sami, Ali, “Persepolis (Takht-i Jamshid)” trans. Rev.Sharp, R. N. (3rd ed. 1958), antepenultimate planGoogle Scholar.

32 Fig. 13 is after Schmidt, op. cit., fig. 84, and completed with measurements made by myself. I am grateful to the Iranian Archaeological Service and the staff of the Museum in Persepolis for their assistance to me while I was working at Persepolis.

33 Schmidt, op. cit., 209.

34 Schmidt, op. cit., 207.

35 Fig. 14 was measured and drawn by myself, with additions from Schmidt, op. cit., fig. 25. The plan is of the reconstruction by the Iranian Archaeological Service and gaps have been left to allow tourists to view the stone griffin capitals, which were abandoned near these rooms.