فهرست مطالب سورنا فیروزی

The Central Zagros was one of the most populous regions in the Iranian plateau in the first half of the first millennium BC, filled with small and semi-extensive settlements. One of the strange and interesting points observed in Mesopotamian sources, belonging to the first millennium BC, is two completely different locations for a land called Parsuaš or Parsumaš. From the reign of Shalmaneser III to Sargon II of Assyria, the name of this land was always mentioned along with the lands located in the east of Assyria and around the Central Zagros. However, from the time of Sennacherib, the land of Parsuaš has been referred to in the vicinity of Anshan and its ally. Additionally, we know that during the rule of the Achaemenid dynasty, the land of the Persians, both before and after the emergence of the empire, was located in southern Zagros. Deciphering the meaning based on the content of written sources obtained from archaeological excavations is a subject that many researchers have attempted to explain. This study reconsiders the subject by examining the content of these inscriptions and evaluating their geographical data. It is concluded that the name of the first land not only refers to the origin of a population but also indicates that its people have made a large-scale migration, to regain their former political independence and freedom. This experience was similar to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. The loss of this independence was due to the failure of the ambitious development plans for the land by the king, which resulted in his fall and the rise of a powerful and influential leader over that land.

Even though Kashtaritu or Kashtariti was not an urban ruler, but he gained such power during the time of Esarhaddon (669-680 BC) that Assyria and other lands were afraid of this issue. This person's position in terms of military point of view had turned the heart of the Assyrian king, and therefore, the name of Kashtaritu is seen many times in the prophetic letters related to the god "Shamash", in which Esrahaddon repeatedly asks whether or not to participate in the war with him. There is a theory about Kashtaritu 's identity, in which he is considered the same as Phraortes described in Herodotus' history. In this article, while examining the details of the information related to Kashtaritu , this adaptation is rejected and then the scope of his territory, who he is in relation to the Medes and his place in the history of Media are discussed. The upcoming research, by examining the documentary data in the Assyrian written sources and comparing them with the information related to the mythological history of the Medes in the writings of authors such as Diodorus (cited by Ctesias), Eusebius, Khorni and Agapius, will determine the position of Kashtaritu from the perspective of this analysis. This article shows that Kashtaritu 's deeds did not affect the historical memory of the Medes, but their memory of his character had an impact on the identity of these people.

The myth revolving around the first Iranian invasion of Turan under the third Kayanid king Kay Khosrow represents a momentous event in the so-called Mythic Stage of Iranian history. Regardless of Kay Khosrow’s warning, Tus, the commander of the Iranian army in this occasion, sets off for Turan, a defiance that would culminate in a clash with Kay Khosrow’s half-brother Farud, the demise of the latter, and the destruction of his fortress. With archaeomythology as its starting point, the present paper attempted an appraisal of the historicity of this myth by means of examining various aspects of the available archaeological data, on the one hand, and the existing texts pertinent to the Mythic Stage of Iran’s history, on the other. Ascertaining the historical form of this mythological narrative in archaeological terms was the main purpose of this study. Along with establishing a chronology for the subject at stake, this paper indicates a demonstrable correlation between the components of the two sides. Examination of geographical, chronological, descriptive and cultural parameters represented the principle research method. Expanded and continued archaeomythological studies will have the potential to produce a better picture of the history of regions that adopted writing much later than Mesopotamia and Egypt.

In the first half of the first millennium BCE, the invasion to Manai, Urartu, Media, and Assyria by two large military forces was one of the most significant events in the West Asian region. This invasion is reflected in both the inscriptions of the Assyrian court and the texts of later Greek authors. This is significant because with the arrival of these emerging groups, new cultural materials infiltrated the conquered territory, and the previously established border equations were disrupted. Concerns have been expressed regarding the population from which these invaders originated, their ethnicity, and their cultural background. While examining these aspects, leading research also addresses where Assyrian cognition and later Persian descriptions of Gimeri/Cimmerian identity originated and how they were created. The present study shows that the two terms “umman-man-da / ma-an-da / man-du” and “ÈRIM/N-man-da / ma-an-da / man-du” in the first millennium BC, in particular, carry both the Medes identity and the prevailing mentality among the kings and court scribes, its expression was specific to the Medes, which, of course, along with them, other forms and sounds have also been used in the mentioned texts. The fact that the name manda was first applied to the land of the Medes in the mentioned millennium is a fundamental point that is discussed in this article.

Various views have been proposed about the religious beliefs of the Medes. Some consider them followers of Zoroastrianism and others have the opposite opinion. This research deals with the following questions: Did different groups of the Medes have the same religion? What are the characteristics of their religion? To what extent was it akin to Zoroastrianism or the common beliefs of the people of Mesopotamia? Contrary to the views insisting on the influence of Mesopotamia worldview on the attitude of Iranians living in the western regions of the Iranian Plateau, the present study shows that based on the content of Mesopotamian documents as the first-hand written sources, Greek-language reports as the second-hand sources, and according to some cultural elements of the Medes (e.g. individual names), the dominant religion of this group of Iranian descent, on the one hand, has similarities to Zoroastrianism and on the other hand, has clear differences with Mesopotamia beliefs. The fact that the religious mentality of a group of the Medes was in complete opposition to the religious culture ruling Mesopotamia forms the foundation of the current paper

In these few decades, and especially The recent two decades, the debate over the date of arrival of Aryan populations on the Iranian plateau has been one of the topics in the world of historical and archaeological studies in Iran. There are two diferent historical-archaeological views in this regard, one of which is more common, the arrival of the Aryans is associated with the Iron Age and the late second millennium BC. Another theory traces the history of the presence of these peoples on the plateau to pre-Iron Age. Ghirshman, Cameron, Dyson and Young's articles form the basis for field examining the interpretations made in the first view and the third volume of Encyclopaedia of Kashan, analyzing the arguments of the second view in this article. The leading article, while examining and criticizing the arguments of the first theory, analyzes the critical reasons of the second view based on the Encyclopaedia of Kashan and the documents presented in it and analyzes each of these components. This, on the one hand, using the study methods available in the archaeomythology approach and, on the other hand, establishing a comparative-analytical study between the data cited in both theories and the data in the written sources of the Mesopotamians that have been overlooked by both sides, and then by stating the strengths and weaknesses of both views, introduces a third theory with a mediating view between the two perspectives.

One consequence of urbanization in ancient times was the emergence of complex states. However, the structure of ancient Iranian states has not been examined in detail compared to the Greek and Roman worlds. Most researchers believe that the political structure of ancient Iran was autocratic and hereditary. This theory can be challenged by carefully assessing the contents of documents and comparing them with archaeological data. The following article discusses the state of the governmental structure of the Median period in the 8th century BC. The purpose is to identify the governing structure of the subjects based on written sources, specifically during the time of the Medes. The chronology and their place of precedence and backwardness compared to what was implemented in Athens and Rome will also be examined. The research questions are based on the examination of the data of the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian period sources about the structure of the Median state and the evaluation of the possibility of the existence of democratic structures in some of the Median settlements or at least in two of them before the kingdom period.This research was conducted using the library method. Based on the study of written sources and analysis of documents, the research shows that in a period of eight years in the history of Media and also in the political structure of a part of the history of the Persians before the rise of the Achaemenid Empire, there were strong elements of the establishment of a democratic governance system.

The battles of the Achaemenid Empire against the European Greeks, alongside the battles of Thermopylae and Marathon, are among the most famous military events in world history.Nowadays, the description of this great Persian campaign is only available to researchers through Greek writings, and therefore, the Eastern perspective on what happened in this event has been left out. Based on Herodotus' reports in his seventh, eighth, and ninth books, and following it, Diodorus in his eleventh book, the Persian army of the Achaemenid Empire was ultimately defeated in the Battle of Salamis after several victories, and with their voluntary withdrawal from the captured city of Athens, the Achaemenids returned to Asia. This was followed by the initial victories of Mardonius and his ultimate failure, which led the military borders of this empire back to its previous European satrapies.This article analyzes another report that depicts a vivid narrative in an Arsacid palace, according to which, Xerxes himself called his final victories in these battles, contrary to the claims of the Greeks.This article concludes that firstly, memories and details related to the events of the Achaemenid era were preserved in the historiography of the Arsacid era, and secondly, based on the ancient Eastern perspective, Greek narratives related to the subject of the Achaemenid campaign in Europe can be seriously criticized.In sum, this article states that the forces of Xerxes and Mardonius were not defeated by the Greek forces. However, due to the damage caused by two storms, their military power was weakened, and as a result, they failed to achieve all their goals. Furthermore, this research suggests that the Battle of Plataea did not unfold as described by Herodotus and Diodorus regarding the role of the Greeks in its outcome.In conclusion, Xerxes' military operations weakened and brought severe calamity to Northern Greece's foundation.

Farhad Tarash is one of the most controversial works left from ancient Iran. Why this work was left unfinished has caused questions in the minds of different generations of Iranians. According to local stories and with the help of national historical reports, some establish a connection between it and Farhad, the rock art man of Khosrow II' era. Some consider it to be a part of the unfinished projects of the mentioned Sassanid king, which they assume after his murder, and others consider it an unfinished Achaemenid work. In this article, by using the content of written sources and field studies, an attempt has been made to provide a logical and documented answer to the historical documents and archaeological findings about the ancient identity of this unfinished surface. The following research states that in the place where Farhad Tarash is now located, there used to be a relief related to the beginning of the second millennium BC, in which, according to the common pattern of reliefs art in the third and second millennium BC, there was a figures of the goddess Inanna besides of some other reliefs and an inscription on Behistun.

When Shamshi-Adad V, the powerful king of Assyria and the successor of Shalmaneser III, overcame his brother's revolt, a new world of people and eastern settlements appeared before him and his army. Among these peoples, the Medes and their royal city, Sagbita, have determined one of the most interesting martial fates in the history of the western plateau of Iran. With the victory over this city, the king of Assyria was able to gain a great territory and thus, after his father, he became the founder of the era of plunder of Median people in the next two centuries. What happened to the royal city of Sagbita in the ninth century BC, and whether there was a connection between it and Ecbatana in the Greek texts and Hagmatāna in the inscription of Darius I in Behistun, is the aim of this research. Also, the relationship between the historical and mythological content of texts related to the emergence of this city is a topic that this study has addressed. The present article shows that although geographically there is no similarity between Sagbita and Bitī-Sagbat with Hagmatāna, the name and memory of the two, as well as the proximity of their geographical boundaries, gave rise to Hagmatāna or Ecbatana in the next century.

Following the content of Pahlavi texts (Middle Persian) and the reflection of their information heritage in the historiography of the Islamic period, today there is a consensus that at least since the Sassanid era to the era of modern studies, Cyrus II was not known to the Sassanid court and society, In such a way that his historical identity is described according to archeological documents and written sources. Whether this was due to the natural flow of time and the loss of the ability to read previous lines or the loss of written data, or a coercive decision, is one of the debates of the leading article. This research first examines the possible and documented next developments of the previous historical information to the Sassanid period and then, within this analysis, what signs of knowledge and lack of knowledge can be traced from Cyrus II to the Sassanid era. In this article, it was seen that around the western borders of the Sassanid Empire, it was possible to have a documentary knowledge of the identity of Cyrus in its historical form. Why and how some of the historical information related to the Achaemenid period, and especially the era of Cyrus II, was excluded from court historiography in the early Sassanid era is the basis of a leading study.

Analysis of the historical roots of myths is one of the goals of the “Archaeomythology” approach, which is done through a pattern of historical approach studies. To be able to extend this pursuit scientifically among the consistent archaeological evidences is an embedded approach in archaeology of other fields, including Egyptology and Chinese archaeology, which can provide a new and significant look at Iranian archaeological research. In this article, an attempt has been made to describe the records of researchers in the field of Archaeomythology in other cultural fields in order to achieve a suitable pattern for similar studies in Iranian archaeology. This paper is based on the analysis and study of information in historical documents, including statistical and geographical information within them, the origin of the first and also the historical form of this foundation of mythical stories and narrations. The main purpose of this article is to be able to deal with the historical basis of a myth through two historical and cultural approaches, and an attempt has been made to reveal the levels of history under the dust of myth.

Based on the data extracted from Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions, this is a famous fact that the report of Shalmaneser III is the earliest text, which has mentioned the political presence of a group of people named Parsuans as the league of 27 rulers" in the second half of the 9th century B.C. Archaeomythology is an integral part of the analysis of culture and historiography of historical nations. The information provided by Greek-speaking authors about the roots of the name of Persians (Πέρσαι) may be one of the basic data used in the background of Archaeomythological research. In this article, based on the components of this archaeological approach, the possibility of dealing with older evidence of the identity and political presence of Persian ancestors or people of Parsua was investigated. The present study showed that a solution could be proposed to establish a connection between the mythological data in written sources and those archaeological written documents obtained from excavations and obtain an older trace of their presence based on this method.

KURPár-su-a-a was a land located in the west of the Iranian plateau on the way of the Assyrian army into the settlements of "A-ma-da-a-a" or Western Medes regions close to "māt Úrarṭu", "Mannai", "Zamua", and "Gizil-p/bunda". The first document referring to the Assyrians' approaching to the Persians was the third paragraph of the fourth column written by Šalmanaser III (A.0.102.6) (Luckenbill 1926: 206; Grayson, 1996: 40). It referred not to a land or a country (KUR or māt), but to a city (URU) by that name. After the reign of Šalmanaser, a land with the same name or in the form of KUR.par-su-áš with the same geographical area was mentioned in the inscriptions of his successors until the 7th century BC. We encountered KUR.par-su-áš in the South Zagros near Anshan (Grayson, 2014: 194, 335), which created some challenges.

In this article, two types of components were considered to analyze the data. One of them was historical nomens (geographical  and ethnical toponymies), which were related to political-ethnic groups and their lands of residence. The other one included the names derived from the mythological justifications in the old texts that were mentioned later in relation to the events or subjects. For example, there was an awareness that the geographical descent name of Pārsa appeared both in Mesopotamian texts (Component A1) (old Persian (comparative evidence of Component 1)) and in Greek texts. In the contents of these Greek texts, there was mainly an explanatory narrative (Witness Component B1) as to why an event occurred or why a name was given to a population based on Greek mythology. In this case, the origin of the Persians nomen in Herodotus's text (Πέρσíς) was also traced back to the myth of "Πέρσης" (Component B1). Herodotus spok of an older historical name for the Persians (Component B2) and its mythological roots (Witness Component B2) (Herodotus, VII: 61), which formed the basis of the study. This article sought out the historical written form (Component A2=unknown) that was associated with the older name of the Persian population.

According to a mythological view that seemed to have prevailed among the Greeks and that Herodotus wrote in his work, the Persian and Persian names had their roots in "Perseus" (Περσεύς), the Greek mythological hero. Herodotus wrote that the Persians were formerly called "Cephenes" (Κηφῆνες) by the Greeks and "Artai" (plural: Ἀρταῖοι) by themselves, as well as their neighbors. When Perseus, Andromeda, (δρονδρομέδα), a son was born to them, who was named "Persis" (Πέρσης). It was from this child that the Persians got their new name (Herodotus, VII: 61). Although Herodotus's reference was clearly derived from an ancient worldview and classical view of demographic etymologies (naming an ancestor after a city, country, or population), it contained a point that was very important from the point of view of the present article. In the report of Aššr-nāṣir-apli II, son of Tukulti-Ninurta II, which related to his campaign in the first year of his reign (883 BCE), he wrote that he left Kalhu (modern Nimrud), crossed the Tigris and down to the other side of the Tigris coast (south), and reached a land called "K/Qipani" (Kipani; KURqi-pa-ni). In a city called "Ḫuzirina" (URUḫu-zi-ri-na), its rulers took tributes (Luckenbill, 1926: 127; Grayson, 1991: 219). The present village of "Khazraniyah" (coordinates of39.36° 35' N and 26.264° 43' E) located in the eastern part of Sharqat in the province of Salahiddin in Iraq.

Based on the analysis of the geographical data of Assyrian texts, as well as the mythological roots presented for the demographic letters in Herodotus's text, an anonymous comparison was made between the 4 components mentioned in this article. In the Assyrian texts, a demographic identity was sought in the coordinates related to the Assyrian neighbors to see if a suitable case could be found to determine the original form of the ancestral name of the Persians before the time of Shalmaneser III from the phonetic, geographical, and temporal points of view. In the era of Aššr-nāṣir-apli II, the father of Shalmaneser, "Kipani land" was seen. From all the three perspectives, it was appropriate to introduce the historical equivalent of the ancestor of the Parsuan people in the mythological narrative of Herodotus, as well as the issue of Cephenes and Persians.

In the contemporary view, washing culture is considered as one of the components of the evaluation of ancient cultures, and therefore, research on it is a necessity. The root of the subject, which is, the need to clear up, is the first step in examining the subject matter. Next, study on when and where the structures associated with bathing, originated, and how they emerged elsewhere, provides the basis for research. Then, the reason of founding thermae and the culture of washing with warm water are studied and their archaeological evidences are evaluated. In this paper, although according to an important principle in Zoroastrianism, the possibility of establishing and disseminating the culture of bathing in Greco-Roman thermae was not possible during the domination of this religion, but it does not mean that Iranians were far from the culture of cleanliness and for this, some, interesting documents are available. This can be proven even in special places for swimming. In fact, the varieties of Iranian and non-Iranian cultures in the Iranian plateau, does not allowed to judge one-sided in this field. The current article shows that in Zoroastrian culture, in addition to a method of creating a reasonable space to facilitate bathing with cold water, a type of thermae emerged that was different from the Roman ones. It was also stated that the culture of washing can be traced in the mythology of ancient Iran, and this can be the basis for some field-comparative studies in Archaeomythology.

According to several inscriptions of Shalmaneser III, the son of Ashurnasirpal II, the beginning of the presence of the Medes and Persians in the west of the Iranian plateau is attributed to the ninth century BC. However, such an absolute interpretation cannot be scientifically valid both for the reasons deduced from the same inscription and following other documents. The fact that Assyrian conquests did not extend very large to the eastern part of their land before Shalmaneser III's that the Assyrian king's vision was a criterion for judging on the one hand, and the existence of older inscriptions with similar content, on the other hand, there are the most important violators of this conception. With the antiquity of the presence of two Iranian populations is mentioned in the region. In this article, first, the problems of Medes and Manneans and the identities of these two populations are analyzed, then the methodology of the mentioned theory concerning the accuracy of reasons for arguing the oldest presence of these two populations in the west of the plateau is examined based on the mentioned inscriptions of Shalmaneser III. In the following, documents are analyzed that show significant citations from previous millennia in this regard. Also in the present article, the content of an inscription by Sargon of Akkad and the study of some specific settlements with features related to the subject of the article is discussed. The current study shows that either the inferential methodology in such issues should be changed or if the same method is the basis of judgment, the content of other texts should be used as a criterion for scientific inference

So far, the Ctesias’s list of Assyrian and Median rulers has not been considered much optimistic among historical archaeologists and academic historians. So that sometimes these reports are interpreted as myths and exaggerations of the author or narrators. This article tries to identify the historical identity of these figures, Unknown cases are dealt with and then scientific chronology and timeline are found for all of them.

So far different views have been put forward about two semi-mythical dynasties of Pishdadids and Kayanids. Some call them whole legends, some believe they are the storied versions of the Medes and Achaemenid era, some claims Pishdadids were legend but the Kayanids were historical and some others believe both were two historical distinct dynasties. But whether there is a field exploration about them or design a chronology based on computing library data, Not much effort could be observed. One of the problems is in which part of historical eras could Kayanids dynasty be placed that could be connected to the Achaemenids and Alexander periods. In this article based on the data of various related documents, this chronology is the issue.