Ali Bahadori; HamidReza Valipour
Abstract
Urbanism as a comprehensive research subject could be explored from various anthropological, social and archaeological points of view. This paper, based on one of these theoretical ...
Read More
Urbanism as a comprehensive research subject could be explored from various anthropological, social and archaeological points of view. This paper, based on one of these theoretical approaches suggesting a direct relationship between the city form and socio-political structure, argues against recent discussions on the urbanization nature of Central Fars during the Achaemenid period. The cultural developments at this region have not been led to establishment of urbanization because of nomadic nature of Achaemenid king, his itinerant court and strong pastoral aspects of population. A survey of current evidence shows that the growth following the foundation of Achaemenid Empire and beginning of building operation at Persepolis was so ephemeral that soon stopped before reaching to the stage of urbanization. The results of recent archaeological investigations at the Persepolis plain reveal that the interpretation of newly discovered material as remains of a city, as excavators claim, is problematic and there is no clear indication of an urban landscape in the region during the Achaemenid period.
