Elymeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran

Author(s): Robert J. Wenke

Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 101, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1981), pp.
303-315
Published by: American Oriental Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/602592
Accessed: 06-03-2018 01:30 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/602592?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of the American Oriental Society

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 ELYMEANS, PARTHIANS, AND THE EVOLUTION OF

EMPIRES IN SOUTHWESTERN IRAN*

ROBERT J. WENKE

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE

Recent archaeological and numismatic evidence from Southwest Iran and adjacent areas has
illuminated some of the complex cultural changes underway in this region during the Parthian
period (c. 210 B.C.-C. A.D. 220). The evidence is still sketchy, but it appears that this period
witnessed fundamental changes in settlement patterns, economic structures, and administrative
systems-changes that were integral to the formation of the first highly centralized, "bureau-
cratic" empires during the Sasanian and Early Islamic eras.

The obscurity of the Parthians is particularly unfor-

ALTHOUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE INSTITUTIONS,' mili-
tunate because recent evidence suggests that the
tary history,2 and numismatics3 of the Parthian Em-
pire (c. 210 B.C.-C. A.D. 220) have occasioned a large
secondary literature, analysis of the role of the
Parthians in the cultural evolution of Southwest Asia
has been restricted by the meagre historical documen-
tation and neglected archaeology of this period.4
1 See, for example, J. Neusner, "Parthian Political Ideol-
ogy," Iranica Antiqua, 3 (1963), 40-59; N. Pigulevskaya, "Les
villes de l'6tat Iran: aux 6poques Parthe et Sassanide," icole
Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne, VI' Section, Docu-
ments et Recherches, 6 (1963), 17-229; Geo. Widengren,
"Recherches sur le feodalisme iranian," Orientalia Suecana, 5of Greater Mesopotamia.
(1956), 79-189.
2 E. J. Keall, "Parthian Nippur and Vologases' Southern
Strategy: An Hypothesis," Journal of the American Oriental
Society, 95 (1975), 619-32; F. A. Lepper, Trajan's Parthian
War (Oxford, 1948); N. C. Debevoise, A Political History of
Parthia (Chicago, 1938).
3 D. G. Sellwood, An Introduction to the Coinage of
Parthia (London, 1971); W. Wroth, Coins of Parthia (British
Museum Catalogue, 1903); G. Le Rider, Suse sous les
Seleucides et les Parthes: Les trouvailles monetaires de la ville
(Mission Archeologique en Iran, 38, Paris, 1965).
4 Parthian occupations were excavated at Susa, Kish, and
other large cities early in this century, but most researchers at
that time were more interested in earlier periods and gave
Parthian "Empire"-widely dismissed as an unstable,
decentralized political system'-was, nonetheless, a
crucial formative stage in the evolution of the first
highly integrated, bureaucratically complex empires in
Southwest Asia. Prior to the Parthians, political sys-
tems in Southwest Asia were for the most part
relatively loose confederations in which central govern-
ments ruled their "empires" through unstable alliances
with vassals and satraps. Even Hammurabi, Darius,
and Alexander were only temporarily successful in
linking their centralized governments to local adminis-
trative institutions, particularly outside the core areas
But various ancient historical sources-almost all
of which, it must be admitted, are untested through
archaeological research-suggest that the Parthians,
and to a much greater extent, the Sasanians, were
significantly more successful than their predecessors
little attention to Parthian remains. The situation has im-
proved greatly in recent years (see, e.g., A. Labrousse and
R. Boucharlat, "La fouille du palais du Chaour a Suse en 1970
et 1971," Cahiers de la Delegation Archeologique Franpaise
en Iran, 2 (1974), 61-168), but even today not a single small or
intermediate Parthian agricultural community has been ex-
tensively excavated and the results adequately reported.
5 E. J. Keall goes so far as to call the Parthians the political

Acknowledgements. I would like to thank Nanette M. Payne, "clowns of the millenium" (in "Political, economic, and social
Prof. Edward Keall, and Prof. Robert McC. Adams for useful factors on the Parthian landscape of Mesopotamia and
suggestions about this article. Western Iran," Bibliotheca Mesopotamica, 7 (1977), 81).

303

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 304 Journal of the American Oriental Society 101.3 (1981)
at integrating constituent ethnic groups, instituting
imperial forms of taxation and conscription, central-
izing agriculture and industry, and competing as equals
with other empires.6
Thus the Parthians and Sasanians were pivotal
elements in the process of evolving imperial power
and control, a process that accelerated under early
Islam7 and continues today.
Historical and numismatic evidence tell us much
about the Parthians' and Sasanians' roles in changing
the political and social complexion of Southwest Asia,
but it is imperative that archaeological research also
be applied to these problems, particularly in analyzing
regional settlement patterns, demographics, agricul-
tural systems, trade, craft production, and other factors
that, while neglected textually, seem to be crucial
elements in these cultural changes.
With these questions and considerations in mind, I
began in 1973 a systematic archaeological survey of
the Susiana Plain, southwestern Iran (Figure 1). The
preliminary results of this survey have been reported
elsewhere,8 and here my objective is to extend the
analyses of the Parthian period in particular and to
integrate them with recent research conducted on
Parthian occupations in other areas.9
We are many years and much archaeological research
away from a synthetic explanation of the Parthians'
role in the great socio-political transformations of the
the most important areas in Southwest Asia. Histori-
6 For a survey of ancient sources on the Parthians see N. C.cal and archaeological evidence demonstrates conclu-
Debevoise, Parthia; Pigulevskaya, "Les villes"; R. N. Frye,
The Heritage of Persia (London, 1962); and L. Dillemann,
Haute Mesopotamie Orientale et pays adjacents (Paris, 1962)
p. 344 (index); for the Sasanians, see Frye, Heritage, and
A. Christenson, L'Iran sous les Sassanides (Copenhagen and
Paris, 1936). For a review of the early Islamic literature on the
Sasanians see Paul Schwarz, Iran in Mittelalter, nach den
Arabischen Geographen (Leipzig, 1921).
7 Some of the social, economic, and political changes
brought about by the Islamic conquest are reviewed in M. G.
Morony, Transition and Continuity in Seventh-century Iraq.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA, 1972.
8 R. J. Wenke, "Imperial Investments and Agricultural
Developments in Parthian and Sasanian Khuzestan: 150 B.C.
to A.D. 640," Mesopotamia, XXI (1975-76), 31-217.
9 R. McC. Adams, Land Behind Baghdad (Chicago, 1965),
61-68; R. McC. Adams and H. Nissen, 7he Uruk Countryside
(Chicago, 1972), 58-59; H. Nissen, "Sudbabylonien in Par-
thischer und Sasanidischer Zeit," Baghdader Mitteilungen, 6
(1973), 82-86; M. Gibson, The City and Area of Kish (Field
Research Projects, Coconut Grove, Florida, 1972).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
first millennium A.D., and it is extremely difficult to
address major problems of cultural change on the
basis of relatively small survey projects in just one or
two of the component regions of these great empires.
Thus, the goal of the 1973 survey was simply to
examine in an important region of the Parthian heart-
land three variables of potentially great significance in
Parthian developments: (1) the emergence of great
urban metropolises as a common feature of Parthian
and Sasanian settlement patterns; (2) major changes
in the spatial arrangement of Parthian and Sasanian
sites with respect to each other, from which economic
and political developments could be inferred; and (3)
economic changes associated in primary historical
sources with the Parthians and the Sasanians, includ-
ing the spread of a money-based economy, massive
imperial investments in dams, canals, and roads, and
the rise of an export-oriented agricultural strategy in
some areas.
These particular variables, it was assumed, would,
if properly investigated, contribute to the formation
of a preliminary analytical model of Parthian and
Sasanian developments in this region.
The Susiana Plain, the geographical focus of the
study, is the easternmost extension of the Mesopota-
mian alluvium, comprising some 2,300 kM2, much of
which is flat, well-watered, fertile land. For over 8,000
years this area's great agricultural productivity and its
central location on trade routes have made it one of
sively that the Susiana was one of the most important
political and economic centers of both the Parthian
and Sasanian empires. The 1973 survey of this area
was designed to locate, it was hoped, every archaeo-
logical site and to map all evident ancient canal
systems. Collections of pottery sherds were taken
from each of the over 1,100 sites located.
The problems of estimating periods and sizes of
occupations represented by archaeological sites are
formidable, but intensive collection methods and mul-
tivariate statistical seriation were used to reconstruct
regional settlement patterns that accord well with
expectations based on numismatic, historical, and
locational geographical evidences.'0 Of great impor-
tance here was the discovery during the survey of
approximately 91 bronze coins and coin fragments,
10 See G. Johnson, "Aspects of Regional Analysis in Ar-
chaeology," Annual Reviews of Anthropolgy, 6 (1977), 479-
508, for a comprehensive review of this subject.
 WENKE: Elymeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran 305

I RAQ ;0 Ad eO sB
54* ~ o IRA
* KNOtnMit
A AN4CIENT CITY
0^ectrct

OAGHDAD Mocm M CITY

SFuSIANA
PLAIN 1p

f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

30'

Figure 1. Mesopotamia

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 306 Journal of the American Oriental Societv 101.3 (1981)
many of which could be matched in all important
characteristics with those excavated at Susa or found
elsewhere in Mesopotamia and dated by inscriptions
or other evidence to the first two centuries A.D.11
analysis begins at about A.D. 36, when Artabanus III,
It is difficult to date with confidence archaeological
sites on the basis of isolated coin finds on their
surfaces, yet in the present case it was demonstrated
by statistical analysis that the same 10 or 12 ceramic
types were found on all or nearly all of the sites on
which the coins were found, suggesting that these
pottery styles were contemporary with these coins.
The evidence was then used to reconstruct the Elymean
(A.D. 25-125) and Terminal Parthian (A.D. 125-225)
settlement patterns (Figs. 3 and 4). Patterns during
prior and succeeding periods are presented in Figs. 2
and 5 for comparative purposes. A detailed analysis of
these patterns is presented below, but first it is useful
to consider their historical context.
Written documents (mainly in Greek, Latin, or
Hebrew) from the first two centuries A.D. in South-
west Asia suggest that the Parthian "Empire" was at
most times an unstable coalition of vassal states
brought periodically under imperial Parthian control.
The Parthian state was often riven by tensions among
the many ethnic groups of which it was composed and
it was also frequently under pressure from Kushans,
Arabs, Romans, and "Scythians," who probed the
Parthian frontiers. Even provinces in core areas of
Parthian control seem often to have connived in
revolts against their Parthian over-lords.
Susa and its environs, usually referred to as
"Elymais" or "Susis" by ancient authors, was a polit-
ical and economic center of the Parthian empire but
was frequently in revolt against Parthian suzerainty.
Alexander had apparently hellenized Susa to the ex-
tent that the language of administration was Greek.
the form of city-state government was Greek, and
even the ethnic composition of the area was partially
Greek.'2 Thus, when Mithradates I (d. 138/7 B.C.?),
one of the first powerful Parthian monarchs, attacked
Demetrius, the Seleucid ruler, Demetrius was able to
rally to his losing cause Susa, as well as Bactria,
Persis, and other areas. Mithradates conquered Susa
and its hinterlands shortly before 140 B.C. and in-
stalled a Parthian administration that probably sur-
vived for most of the next century. We know that by
A.D. 21 Susa was under Parthian control, for in a
letter of this date, written in Greek. Artabanus III, the
I Based on Le Rider, Suse. plates 73 and 74.
12 Pliny, Nlatural HistorY, VI.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Parthian sovereign, validated a contested election at
Susa. '3
The period14 of especial interest to the present
who had been driven to the easternmost portion of his
empire by pro-Roman military pressure and by the
intrigues of his western vassals, was rehabilitated polit-
ically and assisted by anti-Roman factions in invading
Elymais and Mesopotamia proper. Despite these suc-
cesses, the Parthian state was highly unstable, and
Artabanus' death at about A.D. 40, in combination
with financial and military reverses over the preceding
decades, apparently weakened the Parthian state to
the extent that it no longer issued an imperial coinage
and successful revolts were staged at Seleucia-on-the-
Tigris and other cities. At about this same time, it
appears that Susa and its environs were incorporated
into the "satrapy" of Elymais (Fig. 6).
Elymais coined its own money, conducted it own
public works programs, and in other ways was appar-
ently independent until about A.D. 215, when, docu-
mentary evidence suggests, the Parthian imperial
government was once again in control at Susa. 15
Elymais' emergence as an independent state was
paralleled by the rise of Characene16 (also called
Mesene), an Arab state at the head of the Persian
Gulf and centered at the city of Spasinu Charax. Both
Elymais and Characene controlled important trade
routes connecting the Iranian plateau and Mesopo-
tamia with sea and land routes from India and China.
Le Rider has analyzed hundreds of coins at Susa
that were minted at Seleucia-on-the-Tigris, Spasinu
Charax, and other important centers, and it is his
opinion that Susa grew wealthy between about A.D. 40
and A.D. 125 through its role as agent and supplier to
these land and sea trade routes.'7 But after A.D. 107/8,
there was a sharp decline in the number of coins from
other cities in circulation in Susa, at least insofar as
they are represented in the finds at Susa, and Le
Rider interprets this as a reflection of the decline in
Susa's commercial importance.
13F. Cumont, "Une lettre du roi Artaban III," Comptes
Rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions (1932), 238-60.
14For the political history of this era, see Debevoise,
Parthia, 159-212.
15 J. Cantineau, "La Susiane dans une inscription Palmy-
renienne," Melanges Dussaud I (1939), 277-79.
16For a reconstruction of the history of Characene, see S. A.
Nodelman, "A Preliminary History of Characene." Bermtus,
13 (1960), 83-1 12.
17 Le Rider, Suse, 431.
 WENKE: Elvmeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran 307

. q sx~~~~~~~~~ut

I'VE.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ilv 0

USA~~~~~~~~~~~

Figure 2. Distribution of Settlements in the Seleuco-Parthian

Period (c. 325 B.C. - C. A.D. 25)

U-

lipo * f !s -O..

SMIAN

Figure 3. Distribution of settlements in the Elymean Period

(C. AD. 25 - C. AD. 125)

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
308 Journal of the American Oriental Societv 101.3 (1981)

~~J~~4KM

4- 'A a
W- *

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0*~~~~

MAIKIM .-. 0~~~~~~""si (64A

13 1-

~~~i2'~~~~~~7 SMAPUE -- -- ~ SIE IZ 11WIN -.

D is- 4~~~~~~~~~~~

13a

- K

lIVE 55~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

a Ivj~ ~ ~ a

0* 0

b.00

Figure 5. Distribution of settlements in the Early Sasanian

Peid(c D.25 - AD.C c- 400)

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 WENKE: Elvmeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran 309

Otesiphon

:~~~~~~~~~
Probable Extent of| x
Elymais & Chara cnefle
1st CenturyA.A

Figure6. Both Elymais and Characene probably achieved

virtual independence from the imperial Parthian
government and expanded considerably in size
during the first century A.D. [after Keall 1975]

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 310 Journal of the American Oriental Societv 101.3 (1981)
Keall has argued that events in Elymais and
Characene may reflect attempts by Vologases I to
reconstitute Parthian imperial power, in part by stop-
ping the financial losses the Parthians presumably
suffered because of the monopolization of trade routes
by Elymais and Characene.l8 According to Keall,
Vologases' strategy was three-fold: at about A.D. 73 he
imposed a Parthian governor on Characene; he founded
at about A.D. 60 a new city, Vologasias, in the neigh-
borhood of Seleucia-on-the-Tigris, as a competitor to
that Greek-dominated and often insubordinate city;
and he came to terms with Rome over the Armenia
question, thereby strengthening his western flank. Keall
suggests that Osroes, the ruler whose portrait appears
on the coinage of Elymais at about A.D. 75, was used as
a cat's-paw in dealings with Rome in that Osroes may
have been granted by the Parthian crown a "satrapy"
that ranged from Babylon to Baluchistan and included
Elymais. Whether Osroes was a rebel (as McDowell
has argued'9) or vassal, it appears-as is discussed
below that the time of his and his immediate succes-
sor's administrations were periods of radical and rapid
change for the Susiana and perhaps also for much of
Babylonia.
The relationship of Elymais, Babylonia, and adja-
cent areas to the central Parthian state was compli-
cated in A.D. 116 by Trajan's capture of the Parthian
treasury at Ctesiphon and his establishment of bilateral
relationships with Characene, which had rid itself of
Parthian control at about A.D. 73. Trajan's advance
sparked revolts in numerous cities in Mesopotamia,
and it may be that shock waves from these events
reached Susa also, because, as noted, there seems to
have been a rapid decline in commercial activity and a
cessation of the mint at Susa at about this time. Yet
when Trajan died in Mesopotamia in A.D. 117 and his
successors declined to pursue Roman interests there,
Susa and the rest of Elymais seem-at least on the
basis of numismatic evidence-to have been unable or
unwilling to resume their independent roles. This may
have resulted in part from the loss of trade concessions
to Vologasias and the general success of Vologases'
imperial strategy.
Keall reviews evidence indicating a resurgence of
Parthian fortunes at about A.D. 122, but the Parthians,
and perhaps the Elymeans, probably suffered from
competition with the growing economic power of
18 Keall, "Parthian Nippur." R. H. McDowell, Coinsfrom
Seleucia on the Tigris (University of Michigan Studies,
Humanistic Series, 37, Ann Arbor, 1935), 231.
'9 McDowell, Coins, 231.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Palmyra,20 whose leaders Nodelman describes as acting
as agents for the Romans in central Mesopotamia.21
Palmyran merchants may have controlled trans-
Mesopotamia trade without acting through Characene
brokers so that the Parthians lost most of whatever
revenues they were still siphoning from the caravan
trade through this area. Attempts in A.D. 161 by
Vologases III to recoup Parthian fortunes were unsuc-
cessful, and from that point on the collapse of the
Parthian empire awaited only the first military ad-
vances of the Sasanians.
With this historical context, let us consider in more
detail settlement patterns on the Susiana during the
first two centuries A.D. and attempt to link them to
major historical events and processes.
A significant barrier to analyzing the archaeological
record of the post-Achaemenid Susiana is the fact that
large areas of the late Parthian period occupations of
Susa were removed early in this century without
detailed analyses. Recent excavations, however, have
provided much useful information.22 On this basis, it
seems likely that much of the main mound at Susa and
some of the immediately surrounding areas were
densely occupied during this period, constituting, per-
haps, 1.5 km' or more of settled area. Using "standard"
but wholly unsubstantiated formulae for estimating
population size from site size, we might speculate that
from 20,000 to 40,000 people lived at Susa during the
city's florescence under the Elymeans and Parthians.
But it is in the rural settlement patterns that we see
most clearly the extent of demographic and economic
change in the Parthian and Sasanian periods. The
settlement patterns in Figures 2 through 5 indicate that
rural population densities climbed sharply during the
Parthian era, particularly in the first two centuries A.D.
Despite these increases, many fertile, irrigable areas of
the Susiana remained unoccupied and apparently un-
exploited, and there is little to suggest that "popula-
tion pressure" was a major problem here in the
post-Achaemenid period.23
20 Keall, "Parthian Nippur," 631.
2 1Nodelman, Characene, 111-12.
22 R. Ghirshman, Ville perse-achaemenide, (Memoires de la
Mission archeologique en Iran, Mission de Susiana, 36, Paris,
1954); P. de Miroschedji, "Chatier Ville Royale II. Stratig-
raphie de la periode neo-elamite a Suse," (Mimeo, no date);
Labrousse and Boucharlat, "La fouille."
23 Some analysts (e.g., R. McC. Adams, "The Mesopo-
tamian Social Landscape: A View from the Frontier," in
C. Moore, ed., Reconstructing Complex Societies, Supple-
ment to the Bulletin of the American School of Oriental
 WENKE: El'means, Parthians, and the Evolution qf Empires in Southwestern Iran 311

Central Place Theory and other locational geo-
graphic models have been widely applied to archaeo-
logical data, and some applications of these ideas may
be useful in making inferences about the nature of the
economic and administrative changes reflected in these
Elymean and Parthian settlement patterns. Consider
first the matter of the "rank-size plot," a technique in
which settlement patterns are analyzed by graphing on
a full-logarithmic scale the population of a settlement
against the rank of the settlement (that is, the most
populous settlement is ranked first, the next most
populous is second, and so on). Rank-size plots are not
based on deductive theory, but as empirical generaliza-
tions it has been shown that the shape (linear, concave,
or convex) of the line resulting from the plotting of
settlement population against settlement rank cor-
relates with changes in economic and administrative
conditions.24
Zipf,5 for example, suggested that a more or less
linear rank-size distribution was associated with a high
degree of economic and political integration in eco-
nomically developed countries, while Simon related
linear plots to "steady-state" situations in which many
essentially random processes influence the settlement
size distribution. An important departure from the
linear plot is the "primate distribution," in which a
single center so dwarfs other centers that a markedly
concave plot is produced. Primate distributions have
been associated with situations in which economic
growth is largely concentrated in a single center be-
cause of the availability of low-cost labor under a
Research, 20, 1-1 1) have stressed the importance in Meso-
concentrated, efficient administration that discourages
decentralization, or, in a more general sense, with a
situation in which political or economic competition
among different centers has been minimized." Convex
distributions, on the other hand, are less frequently
observed and are not well-explained, although they
may be produced when the size distribution actually
approaches the discrete hierarchies posited by Central
Place Theory or when adjacent but largely indepen-
dently functioning systems are pooled in the same
analysis.28
Applications of locational geographic techniques to
archaeological data require a long list of caveats:
contemporaneity of occupations is difficult to estab-
lish, settlement populations are not just simple func-
tions of site size, although that assumption is usually
made archaeologically, and ancient economic and so-
cial systems may be fitted to models derived from
modern data only with extremely arguable assump-
tions. Yet we can at least look at archaeological data
from this perspective for inferential purposes and
compare these plots with our modest expectations of
what the plots should look like, given historical and
numismatic evidence.
Rank-size plots have been calculated for several
successive periods on the Susiana Plain (Figures 7 and
8) and despite distortions introduced by our specula-
tive estimates of Susa's population at various times,
several points of agreement seem to occur between the
theoretical expectations of the rank-size "rule," the
historical data, and the archaeological evidence.
First, numismatic evidence suggests that the eco-
nomic climax here occurred in the later centuries of the
Parthian era, and in fact we see that the Elymean

potamian economies of combining considerable pastoralism period plot approaches very closely the linear plot

and animal husbandry with agriculture in an extensive, not thought typical of well-integrated, Central Place-type
intensive, fashion, to avoid soil salinization and siltation. In economics, where monetized exchange determines

any case, in societies as complex as those of the first two much of the settlement size and placement. Indeed, the

centuries A.D., "population pressure" must be understood in aperiod during which Elymean coins circulated (reflect-
regional, not local sense. Demographic shifts as far away as ing perhaps, an expanding economy) is the most
Iraq and highland Iran might then have impinged on popula- "linear" of these several plots. Similarly, the economic
tions on the Susiana. stagnation and slow decline posited by Le Rider and
others for the later Parthian era produces the some-
24 For some archaeological applications of rank-sized plots,
see Johnson, "Regional Analysis"; H. Weiss, "Periodization, what convex plot predicted for this kind of situation by
Population and Early State Formation in Khuzestan," Biblio- Vining.29
theca Mesopotamia, 7 (1977), 366-68; and Carole Crumley,
"Toward a locational definition of state systems of settle-
ment," American Anthropologist 78 (1976), 59-73. 2 Reviewed in Johnson, "Regional Analysis," 496-97.
2 Op. cit., 487-99.
25 G. K. Zipf, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least
Effort (Cambridge, 1949). 29 D. R. Vining, Jr., "On the sources of instability in the
26 H. A. Simon, "On a class of skew distribution functions,"
rank-size rule: Some simple tests of Gibrat's Law," Geograph.
Biometrika 42 (1955), 425-40. Anal., 4 (1974), 313-29.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
312 Journal of the American Oriental Society 101.3 (1981)

VC b

1 10 100o~ 1 10 100 1000

SETTLEMENT RtANK SETTLEMENT RANK

Figure 7. Rank-size plots of (a) Seleuco-Parthian and (b) Figure 8. Rank-size plots of (a) Terminal Parthian and
Elymean settlements on the Susiana Plain (b) Early Sasanian settlements on the Susiana Plain

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 WENKE: Ellvmeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran 313
The early Sasanian plot is more or less in agreement
with the suggestion that "primate" distributions occur
under conditions in which strong administrative and
economic centralization tends to dampen competition
and increasing urbanization creates concentrations of
available labor. These conditions have been described
for the Sasanian period by numerous ancient sources.
Later Sasanian settlement patterns are complicated
by the fact that successive kings built on the plain
large, planned cities, most notably Gundeshapur and
Ivan-i Karkha, each of which probably had a popula-
tion of tens of thousands at various times. Susa and
Shushtar were at times also major Sasanian cities, and
the difficulty of estimating their respective populations
make rank-size plots of late Sasanian times uncon-
vincingly hypothetical.
Regarding investments in irrigation systems, land
reclamation, and intensification of agricultural pro-
duction, the 1973 data suggest that the Elymean period
was a particularly expansive era. Complex irrigation
systems were constructed in the area of Susa, filling in
areas that in previous periods were surprisingly lightly
settled, and also in areas on the eastern edge of the
plain where, prehistorically and historically, dry-
farming had been the rule. The Elymeans even invested
heavily in diverting the perennial streams on the
eastern edge of the plain and channelling their waters
through long dendritic canals, some of whose banks
still rise two meters above the plain surface.
Irrigation systems during the Sasanian period were
more impressive than those of the Parthian era in some
ways, such as the relative size of great canals and
qanats constructed to service Gundeshapur,20ical
but all
events.
over the plain the Sasanian rural irrigation systems
seem greatly reduced from the size and complexity of
those of the Parthian period. This is such a departure
from the expected condition, given the traditional,
literary interpretations of Sasanian developmental pro-
grams, that special efforts were made in the 1973
30 R. McC. Adams and Donald P. Hansen have described a
substantial canal and siphon system that apparently brought
water from the Dez River across one of those perennial
streams to supply the city of Gundeshapur, "Archaeological
Reconnaissance and Soundings at Jundi-Shahpur," Ars
Orientalis VII (1968), 53-73. But the perennial stream the
Elymeans apparently used so frequently to irrigate the areas
around Choga Mish shows no evidence of having been used
by the Sasanians for supplying Gundeshapur. This raises the
likelihood that the hydrological regimes of the Susiana were
considerably different during the first two centuries A.D. from morphic structure and topology," Oriens Antiquus XV
what they are today.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
survey to evaluate the articulation of canal systems
with Sasanian sites, and on this basis there seems little
reason to doubt that in rural areas the decline in
irrigation systems under the Sasanians was real and
substantial, despite the impressive Sasanian weir at
Shushtar and canal systems elsewhere.
Parthian and Sasanian attempts to intensify agricul-
tural production through elaborate water-control sys-
tems and rice-paddy and orchard crop cultivation were
fundamental breaks with the agricultural strategies of
the previous five millennia, and it may be that their
success was only temporary, for large areas of the
southern Susiana are today so heavily salinized that
they are either suitable only for barley cultivation or
are entirely out of cultivation. Adams notes:
Whatever the ambitious policies proclaimed from time
to time in the capital cities, there is little reason ... to
expect any local support whatever for expensive agri-
cultural facilities like land-leveling, drainage systems,
intensive applications of artificial fertilizers, or the
construction of permanent barrages and other hydrau-
lic works. Not intensive, but extensive, periodically
shifting agriculture with a large component of hus-
bandry is and has always been the system best adapted
to Mesopotamian conditions?'
From this perspective the decline of Susa as a
commercial capital after about A.D. 100 and the retrac-
tion of rural population densities in Sasanian times
may have had as much to do with local agricultural
problems (such as salinization) as with regional polit-
One of the most radical settlement pattern changes
instituted during the Elymean period was in the layout
and construction of many rural villages and towns. For
millennia the people of the Susiana, as did their
counterparts elsewhere in Southwest Asia, reoccupied
particular locations with such consistency that the
well-known "tell" sites were formed. Yet the Elymeans,
and the Sasanians after them, constructed on virgin
land scores of communities whose archaeological re-
mains suggest that they were sprawling, unwalled
villages of very different composition from that of the
densely packed, circumvallated communities of pre-
vious periods.32 Today, these sites are composed of
scores of "hummocks" 1 to 2 meter rises that are
31 Adams, 'Mesopotamian landscape," 5.
32 Adams, "Mesopotamian landscape," 35-36; Rowton, "Di-
(1976), 17-31.
 314 Journal of the American Oriental Societv 101.3 (1981)

covered with pottery and other artifacts but are sepa-
rated by lower intervening areas with little evidence of
occupation.
The great conservatism of village architecture over 7
millennia in Southwest Asia suggests that the typical
walled village constructed on a tepe was an extremely
efficient adaptation to the economic, hydrological,
social and political factors of this long period of time.
By the same reasoning, the radical changes in construc-
tion and architectural types in the Elymean and subse-
quent periods suggest that the basic organization of
these communities was changing. If the Susiana devel-
opments were unique, we might suspect they were
functions of local conditions, but these same patterns
of architectural change have been observed elsewhere
on the Mesopotamian alluvium and, therefore, are
probably a response to important changes in politics,
economic, or social conditions.33 Because not one of
these sites has ever been excavated, however, our
interpretations of what conditions produced them re-
main speculative. On the Susiana, the foundation of
these sites on what appears to be virgin ground in most
cases may be related to the rising population densities
of this period (yet there are many older mounds that
remained unoccupied throughout the Parthian era) or
perhaps to the advantages of locating near areas newly
put into rice, sugar cane, or orchard cultivation. The
lack of walls may be a reflection of a strong central
government, or, alternatively, changing economic con-
ditions. The lower areas within these sites usually have
low densities of debris, and may have been cattle-pens,
areas for processing sugar cane or other crops, or some
other special purpose area. The location of these on the
eastern edge of the plain in traditional dry-farming
areas is probably not indicative of their agricultural
basis, as these areas clearly show intensive canal
construction and irrigation.
Only additional research will allow us to determine developments on the Susiana Plain during the Partho-
which of these of other factors were important in these Sasanian era and for this area in this period the
radical architectural and settlement pattern changes. following conclusions seem warranted: (1) "urbanism,"
The circulation of bronze coins at these rural sites is
subject to varying interpretations. At different times
vassals minted coins at major cities in Southwest Asia,
3 Identical changes have been recorded by Adams in several
areas of Iraq (e.g., Land Behind Baghdad, 73), although he
attributes most of these amorphous settlements to the Sa-
sanian period. The discovery of Elymean coins on many of the they were functionally different from the "standard"
Susiana sites of this type, however, and the statistical analyses
leave little doubt that this development, on the Susiana at
least, was well underway during the Parthian period.
often no doubt with the intention of marking their
independence and power.34 Yet the Susiana coin finds
suggest that bronze Elymean coins at least for a time
played a significant role in rural economies, since these
coins are found on many small rural hamlets, not just
at Susa and larger sites, and are found in several
denominations and in issues that spanned at least
several decades.
Generally, opinion seems to be that small bronze
coinages in these early historic empires served to
facilitate the exchange of small amounts of goods and
services." If this was the nature of Elymean trade, we
might wonder that bronze coins appear to have been
used extensively only in the period from about A.D. 75
to A.D. 210; why are Sasanian and Islamic occupations
not marked with a similar frequency of coins at these
rural settlements?
The coincidence of these coins with the period of
maximum rural population density and apparently
high levels of local capital investment may suggest that
these coins were most useful-and most used-during
an economic upswing, but these coins may also repre-
sent a greater degree of local autonomy and economic
exchange in the period of their circulation. When the
Sasanians took over the Susiana they minted and
circulated vast quantities of silver and gold coins, types
of money more useful perhaps in state-organized ex-
port trade, presumably under imperial direction from
Gundeshapur or Ivan-i Karkha, or in payment for
large quantities of textiles and other industrial craft-
products for which the Susiana was already famous in
Sasanian times. Yet the advantages of a bronze coinage
raises the question of why later coinages apparently did
not circulate among rural communities in quantities
comparable to those of the Elymeans. Obviously,
additional fieldwork is needed here.
In summary, I have reviewed here several specific
for many previous millennia a feature of life on the
Susiana, was greatly stimulated in the Parthian and
Sasanian periods, particularly in the sense of rural
migrations to cities and the development of large,
planned metropolises; (2) the radical change in village
and town architecture of the Parthian period, ex-
pressed in the proliferation of open, unwalled com-
munities whose surface debris, at least, indicates that
34 Le Rider, Suse, 428.
35 Sellwood, Coinage of Parthia, 6.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 WENKE: El}nmeans, Parthians, and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern iran 315

settlement type of preceding millennia, probably indi-
cates greatly altered social and economic arrange-
ments; significantly, these architectural changes are
products of the Elymean and Parthian periods, al-
though they continue and increase in frequency in the
Sasanian and Early Islamic periods, and they appeared
in many areas of Greater Mesopotamia; (3) in terms of
a heavily monetized economy, massive capital invest-
ments in dams, roads, and canals, and great intensifica-
tion of agriculture, the Parthians' and Elymeans'
efforts on the Susiana are more impressive in many
ways than those of the Sasanians.
The general point to be made, therefore, is that
analyses of the dynamics of empires in Southwest Asia
would be greatly advanced by a more intensive archae-
ological investigation of Parthian and Elymean occu-
pations, as well as expanded analyses of Sasanian
materials. If we are to understand these major cultural
transformations, we must examine them in their early
phases, not just their climactic forms. Nor can we
concentrate on or base sweeping generalizations on
research in one or a few provinces of these empires.
Explaining these cultural changes will require com-
parative researches in many component regions of
these ancient political systems and the patient and
careful integration of archaeological, textual, and
numismatic evidence.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 06 Mar 2018 01:30:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms