Abstract
One of the burial methods in the Zoroastrian religion is the Xwaršēd Nigerišnand the placement of the corpse in the towers of silence. With reference to the classical sources and archeological findings, this burial tradition has been reported in the Zoroastrian religion from the beginning of the historical period until today. So far, few studies have been carried out on the tower of silence of Ray. These studies often focus on description of the site and its architectural features. It is not possible to acquire a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of this architectural structure and the construction history of the site by solely relying on these studies. This research tries to evaluate the evolution of the architecture of the tower of silence of Ray from the early to the late Islamic centuries. In addition, it seeks to obtain evidence regarding the relative construction dating of the site. As a result, this research tries to answer two questions: 1) how was the original architectural structure of the tower of silence of Ray and what architectural developments have taken place in it? 2) With reference to the literary sources and comparative studies, when was the tower of silence of Ray constructed? In order to find answers to the aforementioned questions, a descriptive-analytical method has been used. The library method, alongside with field and comparative studies were the most important information gathering means for this investigation. The results of this study indicates that the tower of silence of Ray belongs to the Early Islamic period and continued to be used up to the Late Islamic era. Furthermore, the comparative study of the architectural structure of the site, while confirming the proposed dating, places the tower of silence of Ray alongside with the tower of silence of the Yazd Mountain and the ancient Dakhma of Kerman in a particular generation of towers of silence. A generation that continued the tradition of the Pre-Islamic era towers of silence and represented the towers of silence of the early Islamic centuries.
Keywords: Tower of Silence, Ray, Early Islamic Centuries, Late Islamic Centuries, Architectural Structure.

Introduction
One of the oldest burial traditions in the ancient world is the XwaršēdNigerišn or the exposure of a corpse to open air. This burial tradition has been reported from the Epipaleolithic (McAuley, 2013: 8) and Neolithic periods (Hole & Flannery, 1963: 245-246; Lambert, 1980: 6) to the present day (Geiger, 1885: 88). There is still no accurate information regarding the entry of this burial tradition into Zoroastrianism and the quality of its spread in ancient Iran. Literary sources and archaeological data provide scattered information about this burial tradition in the Achaemenid (550-330 B.C.), Parthian (247-224 A.D.) and Sasanian (224-651 A.D.) periods. Herodotus mentions the prevalence of XwaršēdNigerišn among the Magians (Herodotus, Histories: I: 140; Godley, 1920: 179) and Strabo considers it a common tradition in the eastern regions of Iran during the Parthian period (Strabo, Geography: XXI. 3. 15; Sanatizadeh, 2003: 327).Although the XwaršēdNigerišn was mostly carried out in the mountains, without involving or creating architectural constructions, in some cases this tradition was performed in circular and enclosed spaces known as the towers of silence. The tower of silence of Chil’pyk in Khwarezm dates back to the 2nd - 4th centuries A.D. (Abdullaev, 2014: 309) and while confirming Strabo’s claim, represents the oldest instance of a Zoroastrian tower of silence in the eastern domains of the Parthian Empire. At the same time, the performance of XwaršēdNigerišn in the theater of Ai Khanom, after the departure of the Greeks, is another evidence of Dakhma burial in the Eastern Parthian lands (Frye, 1984: 190). So far, only the roofed tower of silence of Bandian has been reported from the Sasanian period (Rahbar, 2007: 455-473).This burial tradition later emerged in the Islamic period and became the most common burial method among Zoroastrian minorities.
An instance of Zoroastrian tower of silence burials can be seen at the slopes of Mount Tabarak in the city of Ray. On the one hand, this tower of silence follows the tradition of the tower of silence of Chil’pyk(Abdullaev, 2014: 309), and on the other, it is a reminiscent of the Dakhma of Yazd Mountain and the ancient Dakhma of Kerman(Huff, 2004:620-623). The lack of entrance space and the use of grave-like pāvis for the Xwaršēd Nigerišnare the architectural features of this burial structure that cannot be perceived in similar cases. The reports of the European travelers of the Qajar period (D’Allemagne, 1956: 803; Dieulafoy, 1992: 146-148; Orsolle, 2003: 303;Feuvrier, 2006: 190; Williams Jackson, 2008: 495), along with the monograph of Wolfram Kleiss (Kleiss, 1987: 369-382), and the brief description of GhadirAfround and KhosroPourbakhshandeh who surveyed the city of Ray (Afround&Pourbakhshandeh, 2002: 62), constitute the bulk of available information regarding the tower of silence in Ray. In this research, in the first place, an attempt has been made to identify the architectural structure of the tower of silence in Ray. In the next step, the architectural developments of the tower of silence will be evaluated, and finally, some hypothetical assumptions regarding the construction date of the site will be presented. In order to achieve the aforementioned goals, the study of literary sources and a comparative study of the tower of silence of Ray with similar structures is the approach of the present research.

Description of the site
The tower of silence of Ray is an isolated structure and does not have any extensions. It is situated on the northern slope of Bibi Shahrbanu Mountain, overlooking the seventh unit of Tehran Cement Factory in Ray County, at 39.217 ′51 ′ longitude and 15.388 ′36 ′ latitude and an elevation of 1203 meters above sea level. This burial structure is built with stone rubble and plaster mortar and has a diameter of 1780 cm, a height of 450 cm, and an average thickness of 100 cm (Figs. 1-2).

Evaluation
The evolution of the architectural structure and the dating of the site are the two research problems of the tower of silence in Ray.Abu Dulaf al-Khazraji’s reference and Nizam al-Mulk’s explanation are indicative of a Zoroastrian burial structure at the slopes of Tabarak Mountain in Ray. Probably, its positioning on the other side of Mount Tabarak and behind the city of Ray was due to the burial nature of the site and the performance of Xwaršēd Nigerišn in the open air. In addition, it can be assumed that the presence of Bibi Shahrbanu Shrine near Mount Tabarak was influential in the construction of the tower of silence on northern slope of the mountain. At any rate, although the word “sotōdān” had evolved from “astōdān” (i.e. bone-container), Nizam al-Mulk’s explanation is reminiscent of an architectural structure. The “sotōdān” of the Siyāsatnāmeh (i.e. Book of Politics) is mentioned in the same section where the tower of silence in Ray is located. At least until the Qajar era, this “sotōdān” was without an entrance door, and one had to use a ladder in order to get inside. The double-layers of the“sotōdān”may also indicate that the tower of silence was double-surfaced. These statements are repeated several centuries later in the reports of European travelers. The use of pāvi-like graves for the Xwaršēd Nigerišn, the absence of a central a stōdān and the deposition of bones in the corner of thetower of silence are other information that European travelers of the Qajar period have provided. Despite the emphasis on the lack of an entrance until the Qajar period, in the aerial photograph from 1335 (and onwards) and Kleiss’s visit in 1985, the tower of silence can be seen with one or two entrance doors. In addition, a podium has been built next to the site, which was probably created after its abandonment. During the surveys, no bones were found in the pit at the center of the tower of silence. This pit was made by unauthorized excavators, probably dug in the contemporary period. A comparative study of the tower of silence of Ray with other towers of silence of Iran indicates that the Ray’s example is comparable with the silent tower of the Yazd Mountain and the ancient Dakhma of Kerman from the following points of view: 1) the existence of an enclosure wall, 2) the lack of a central a stōdān, 3) the place where bones are collected in the corner of thetower of silence, and 4) the lack of extensions. At the same time, the absence of a roof, astōdān rooms, and central a stōdān shows that the main structure of the tower of silence in Ray should not have been built after the Seljuk period. The existence of the enclosure wall also implicitly testifies to the Islamic nature of the tower of silence. With reference to Abu Dulaf’smention and Nizam al-Mulk’s report, it can even be assumed that the tower of silencein Ray belongs to the Buyid period. Thanks to the works of Islamic era authors, there are available reports on the freedom of religious minorities, the tendency of the power holders to pre-Islamic cultural traditions, and the relative power of the Zoroastrian minority during the Buyid period.

Conclusion
One of the burial traditions in the ancient world was the exposure of a corpse to open air. This burial custom later entered the Zoroastrian religion and became one of the common burial methods of this religion. The practice of XwaršēdNigerišn in the towers of silence is one of the examples of this burial tradition in Zoroastrianism. An instance of this burial method has been reported at the Bibi Shahrbanu Mountain in Ray. In this research, the tower of silence in Ray was examined and studied from the perspectives of date of construction and architecture. The study of historical texts and evaluation of available evidence indicates that the tower of silence in Ray was constructed during the Early Islamic centuries and continued to be used up to the Late Islamic centuries. The recurrence of the Book of Politics’ statements regarding the architecture in the reports of Qajar era travelers, while confirming the dating of the site, provides a partial understanding of the original construct of the tower of silence in Ray. The second phase of the architectural evolution of the site goes back to the Qajar period. Despite Maneckji’s residence in Tehran during the Qajar era and his influence on the architectural structure of the towers of silence in Iran, his proposed model has never been implemented in the tower of silence in Ray. The application of grave-like pāvis is one of the few changes made in the architectural structure of this tower of silence in the Qajar period. The creation of the podium and the entrance, probably during the Pahlavi period, is the last phase of architectural changes in the tower of silence in Ray. Regarding the architectural model of the tower of silence in Ray, it can be stated that it is the continuation of the tower of silence of the Yazd Mountain and the ancient Dakhma of Kerman. These burial structures, all of which probably belong to the first centuries of Islam, are limited by an enclosure wall and the XwaršēdNigerišnwas performed inside its natural space. The absence of a central astōdān and the place where bones are collected in the corner of the tower of silence are the other common features of these burial tradition in the first centuries of Islam in Iran. Although the architectural structure of the towers silence changed as a result of socio-religious developments of Zoroastrianism in later periods, the Ray’s example continued to exist without being influenced by newer generations. As a result, based on the architectural and literary sources studies, the tower of silence in Ray shows the continuation of the tradition of the tower of silence of the Yazd Mountain and the ancient Dakhma of Kerman and hence related to the early Islamic centuries in Iran. The literary sources of the early Islamic centuries, while confirming this dating, provides relative statements about the architectural structure of the tower of silence. The Buyid period, one of the golden ages in the history of Ray, as Nizam al-Mulk has pointed out, can be considered as a hypothetical assumption for the construction of this Zoroastrian burial structure. A period in which, thanks to the literary sources of the Islamic period, there is information, albeit scant, regarding the position of this religious minority in its sociopolitical affairs.

Abstract
Undoubtedly, the southern area of Tehran province, which has been formed in the fourth region over time, especially in the late Islamic centuries, based on historical sources; It was always of great importance for the governments of this era from the point of view of geographical and political location. One of the reasons for the importance of this area was its location on three important communication routes that connected Tehran to Qom. The above research was carried out with the objectives of identifying and documenting as well as understanding the formation and function of related facilities in the ancient roads located in the south of Tehran to Qom province, in which two questions are also raised: 1) the most important communication roads located in the southern part of the province What are the communication routes between Tehran and Qom? And 2) which pattern or patterns did the studied road network generally follow? Based on this and relying on historical written sources and archeological field studies, we can propose the following hypotheses: three important communication routes in the studied area, from the dimensions of road scenery [residence-welfare, security-guidance-movement scenery] which are a They were a coherent group, they obeyed. Routes that, apart from having (commercial and economic effects) Functions on the communities living in their neighborhood; they also had many effects on the (cultural and social relations) of these societies. The present research was done with descriptive-analytical method and gathering information in the form of documentary and historical studies and archeological investigations. The results of the present research indicate that three important communication networks [1) Abdul Azim Ray Gate - Kenargerd - Dier kechein - Qom, 2) Aliabad - Hoze Sultan - Qom (abandoned) and 3) Aliabad - Manzariyeh - Qom] in the southern region of Tehran province. It was located towards Qom in chronological order.
Keywords: Road Network, Tehran, Qom, Late Islamic Centuries, Archaeological Evidence, Historical Texts.

Introduction
Regarding the description and recognition of the ancient and communication routes from the south of Tehran province to Qom in the Islamic era, at the beginning with the center (Rey) and later (Tehran), there have been several historical and geographical documents that show that the communication routes The above in this area were of great importance for the governments of this period. Ibn Faqih, describing the main roads of Ray to the neighboring areas in terms of commercial nature, says: Goods were also produced by Ray artisans, they made crafts such as combs and salt pans, etc. from wood. Ray weavers were also famous worldwide and all kinds of They exported clothes to the eastern and western regions through the important roads of this city) (Ibn Faqih, 2000, 51). Moghdisi also writes about the roads of Ray from a (mobility-security) point of view: ((the easiest and most prosperous road in Iran is the road of Ray)) (Moghdisi, 1982: 718) and further says: it is clear that this feeling Comfort and security should be established for travelers so that they can easily take advantage of all the sights and facilities provided near the road (ibid., 574). Ibn Hawqal also paid attention to the Ray road from the (commercial nature) and in this context he says: Apart from Isfahan, which was a commercial and important city, from Iraq to Khorasan (Ray) can be mentioned, which is The reason for having different main and secondary ways in terms of production and export of goods is unique and significant (Ibn Hoqal, 1987: 106). Bakran considers the distance between Ray and Isfahan to be about 62 farsang (Bakran, 1963: 15) and Imam Shushtari, like Bakran, considers the distance between Ray and Isfahan to be 62 farsang (Imam Shoshtari, 1960: 35). Mostofi states that the distance between Ray and Isfahan is 86 farsang (Mostofi, 1983: 51). In the last few decades, our understanding of the above-mentioned communication routes relied more on the same historical documents. However, due to the abundance of archaeological evidence related to these routes, which included buildings and facilities related to them; In previous years, they have been studied and investigated by some researchers and archaeologists in the field, and these archeological evidences themselves support the first hypothesis in line with their alignment with the writings of historical-geographical texts and travelogues in the best possible recognition of communication routes. It illuminates between the two cities of Tehran and Qom.

Discussion
The southern region of Tehran province was considered as one of the key strategic and geographical regions during the late Islamic centuries. The existence of numerous buildings and intermediate structures in the three ancient routes of Tehran - Qom, shows the archaeological evidence and the importance of this region. As mentioned, this highway starts its route from the south of Tehran province and passing through the cities and villages located in this area to the city of Qom and from there, turning into several branches to other parts of the country such as Isfahan, Kashan, Arak and others. The southern regions are connected. One of the most important features of this highway is its (cultural and religious) dimension. The cultural and religious dimension of this course can be seen as the first option that was always considered by the rulers of the late Islamic centuries, especially Safavieh and Qajar. The reason for this importance was the existence of the holy court of Hazrat Masoumeh in the city of Qom. Therefore, this issue caused the rulers of the later Islamic centuries to build and erect numerous buildings and facilities on the way to the extent possible for the well-being of these pilgrims and caravans, and many of these buildings are still standing. Another importance of Tehran-Qom highway; It was connected with the Tehran-Khorasan highway, which along with this highway was also considered one of the cultural routes and thresholds of Iran’s nobility. The third strategic importance of the Tehran-Qom highway is the ((commercial)) dimension in the way that in the late Islamic centuries, this highway was a very important bridge for the exchange of commercial and commercial goods that went to Tehran and the north of the country through Bushehr port. were carried One of the other important issues that always add to the importance of the Tehran-Qom highway was the (political and military) dimensions, because the statesmen of the late Islamic centuries [Safavieh and Qajar] to advance their goals in these fields and reach the capital as quickly as possible. As well as the open waters through the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea and on the other side of the Caspian Sea, they urgently needed a good route to achieve these goals, which has high levels of amenities and road-dependent facilities. Therefore, the existence of these mentioned dimensions has proved the special importance of the southern region of Tehran province.

Conclusion
Based on the questions and assumptions raised, as well as citing historical sources, archeological investigations and the analysis of these components together, we can reach the conclusion that the southern region of Tehran province due to its special cultural and political position that during the last centuries Islam has always been important from the rulers of this era, and on the other hand, categories such as trade brought the transfer of cultural and social experiences to the people living along these communication networks, and these communities themselves are somehow a part of this economic cycle. and were considered cultural. Therefore, the existence of these three important communication routes: 1) Abdul Azim Ray Gate - Kenargerd - Dier kechein - Qom 2) Aliabad - Hoze Sultan - Qom [abandoned] and 3) Aliabad - Manzariyeh - Qom, which also followed the patterns of Manzariyeh Road. The importance of this area is increasing. so, from the archaeological evidence that included buildings and intermediate structures [caravans and bridges], he also acknowledged that the studied routes were always the place of traffic and passage of many commercial caravans and travelers. However, several reasons can be imagined in the field of recognition, formation and functioning of these communication ways and the buildings and structures located in them: 1) the history and long history of the territory of southern Tehran province in the creation of roads and facilities related to them. 2) Two factors of preparation of main roads and provision of comfort facilities and safety of travelers and caravans ((road monitors)) which were realized by completing road construction and construction of intermediate buildings: a) establishment of caravanserais and shelters. b) Creating water structures and solving problems of lack of water in these routes (reservoirs and glaciers). c) Establishing security and guarding caravans and passengers. 3) The religious and political competitions of the governments of this period [Safavieh] with other governments [Osmani] in order to encourage the people of Iran to visit the shrines. 4) The military and administrative dimension and the political competition of the Western governments such as Russia and England were taking steps to dominate the roads of this region in the advancement of their colonial interests. In the end, what can be said about these ancient ways: that they are the same communication networks of today that have continued to exist with little changes.