One of the controversial architectural monuments in Iran historical era is a building that today, is known to Anahita temple. In summary, three expeditions excavated in Kangavar terrace that all of them conducted by Iranian experts. The first expedition conducted by Seifollah Kambakhshfard, from 1968 to 1975. He concluded that kangavar terrace was Anahita temple, and it is Where that Isidore of Charax so called Artmis temple. He reported that it had constructed in from fourth and fifth century B.C and it used until end of the Sassanids era. The second expedition conducted by M.Azarnoush, from 1976 to 1977. He believed that the historical monument of kangavar is Ghasr-e lesus, which has been reported in resources of Islamic historian. He supposed Kangavar terrace is a palace from second Khosro era. Azarnoush published a design that it be on basis of design of Alexander verika, but he added some crenation’s to the covering upside of columns.
The third expedition conducted by Mohammad Mehryar and have begun their excavations and repair operation from 1988 until 2000. He reported that the columns which were on the perimeter terrace wall, had been uncovered. Mehryar have presented a design which have shown three uncovered terraces and have shown uncovered columns of external façade wall of perimeter terrace against of other group opinions.
At present, the reasons which proved that Kangavar terrace is a cult that had been belonged to Second Khosro era are as follow:
A-The form of building plan which had been composed of three uncovered terrace and it is obvious that no royal palace or residential building had been constructed uncovered.
B-The form of Sassanid places which had been composed of a Ivan which led to the yard. On the other hand, Sassanid palaces usually contained numerous decorations of stucco; however, it is not found any small slice in excavations.
C-It found some engraved capital in Taq-e Bostan that it belongs to the Second Khosro probably, also historical resources reported that some monuments of Khosro consist of: palace, kitchen and so on in Kermanshah district.
Keywords: Anahita Temple, Kangavar, Khosrow Parviz, Dadi Vank.
This paper concluded that Historical monument of Kangavar had been a cult which had been belonged to Sassanid Second Khosro. In fact, this holy place had been a place that the second Khosro had wanted to construct near of his palace and symbolic grave (Taq-e Bostan). This monument had been three uncovered terraces and there had been one two sided stairway which had been in southern edge that had been composed the basic entrance of the building. The author believes that if we suppose Kangavar building as three uncovered terraces, with compared to the ceremonies and rites which had been seen in Armenian monasteries, especially in Dadivank and it had been the reflex of ceremonies of antique Mazdisnan. We can imagine that such ceremonies had been implemented in Kangavar building, but the style of shaving stones, thickness and short columns had been comparable with the lithic building of Zvartons temple which had been belonged to seventh century A.D in Armenia. This building had been constructed by Armenian architectures in according to the Christian column structure accompanying with trinity belief of Holy Gregory. This belief has been shown precisely in construction of this temple. In another place in Dadivank monastery which had been belonged to the middle ages (12-20), prayers and prayers walk through the mountains routes and enter to the collection as pilgrim in order to implementing the religious ceremonies and rites. When they enter to the collections, they understand that there is a chapel in middle part which is called Khachkars. There are holy trees and water fountain in this place. When they enter the temple, the believes should pass among the holy spaces. This first holy place is western entrances which has been constructed skillfully and have rich decorations. The second holy place is chapel hall and the third and the last holy place and also the most sacred place is altar that is called Khoran. At here there is altar situated against a window and is a place which God should appear in it and the prayers communicate with him and hold the ceremonies of cult and prayer. It seems, in Kangavar’ terrace, the king and praises after climbing of southern step to top of the first terrace, that had been called perimeter terrace, had been reached to the place which it’s uncovered columns like the circuit wall of holy trees had been shown the frontage and border of the cult. A Number of people should had stood or waited in this terrace. Then, a number of other people had been gone to the middle terrace which had been probably a chapel. The praises of two aforesaid terraces had been the witnesses of implementing the fire ceremonies in third terrace which in fact, had been a cult. According to the reports of historical resources, especial Zakariya Mahmod Ghazvini, after Khosrow parviz death, this building had been remained imperfect and never had been exploited completely.
- Abrahamian, L. & Sweezy, N. (2001). Armenian. Folk Arts, Culture and Identity, Indiana University Press.
- Dieulafoy, M. (1884). L’art antique de la Perse. Paris.
- Flandinet, C. (1840-1841). Voyage en Perse Pendant les annees 1840 –1841. Paris.
- Isidore-Charax. (1914). Parthian Staions" The Greek Text, with A Translation and Commentary. Ares Publishers, Chicago.
- Kerporter, R. (1821–1822). Traveles in Georgia Persia. Armenia and Ancient Babylonia. London.
- Kleiss, W. (1998). “Terrassenanlagen in der iranischen Architektur”. AMI 30: 239-243.
- Kröger, J. (1982). “Sasanidischer Stuckdekor: Ein Beitrag zum Reliefdektor aus Stuck in Sasanisischer und frühislamischer Zeit ...,”. Baghdader Forschungen 5, Berlin.
- Pickworth, D. (2005). “Excavations at Nineveh: The Halzi Gate”. IRAQ LXVII: 295-316.
- Pope, A. (1967). “A survey of Persian Art”. Volume 2. London: 203-260
- Siroux, M. (1965). Atesh-Gah presD’Ispahan. Leiden.
- Texier, C. (1842). Description De La’Rmenie. La Perse Et la Mesopotamie, Paris.