Page:History of Art in Persia.djvu/379

Some more Palaces other than at Persepolis. 357 Fig. 17a— Shim. View of roiiis oTa pala Any Me ien u A Putft LV. •ce. FtAKDiN and Com, scattered about ; whilst figures of servitors carrying napkins and vases, with which the buildings of the Takht-i-Janishid have familiarized us, reappear on the jambs of doorways (Fig. 172). The impress of the royal architecture of the Achsemenidae is mani- fest on one , . - - and all of these frag- " . . . ■ . ' " ments. But _ " " whether the palace — as a superficial ex- a m i n a t i o n would incline one to believe — dates from the reign of Cyrus or Cam- byses, or whether, siding with explorers who have studied the site, we should look upon it as a monument built with materials stolen from the ruins at Persepolis, transported and set in place to gratify the whim of some prince or other, is not so easy to determine.^ The platbands or lintels are of different size and do not match» and the striated stones of the thresholds are clearly fragments of cornice. Then, too, here and there are vestiges of walls made of rubble laid out in mortar with strange carelessness. Some have sought to solve the question by comparing and measuring the gaps left in the edifices at Persepolis with the stones under notice, but we do not think the point at issue admits of being definitely settled that way, since buildings, now com- ' His/, of Atif torn. v. pp. 579-580. Like Morier, the elder Niebuhr had come to the condttrion that the structure was erected with old materiala pteced together ( Fifjfiige tu ArtMtf torn, il p. 136)1 FlO. 171.— Shirar. Plan of Uulding. JM, Fig. 172, — Shiraz. Elevation and MCtioQ of one ol the door- Digitized by Google