Vol. 1, No.

2, Summer-Autumn 2015 International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists

Symbols of the Clan of Qāren and the Rank of Bidaxš

in Sassanian Times
Sorour Khorashadi
Tarbiat Modares University, Iran

Received: April 13, 2015 Accepted: July 3, 2015

Abstract: Sassanian artists were realistic in creating memorial artworks, but their artistic style did not necessarily result in exact
depiction of figures with accurate facial representations. In contrast, such realism manifests itself only through determined appearances
and unchangeable artistic conventions. Doing so, identifying people is only possible by recognizing their distinct crowns, headbands,
attire, specific signs, position in queues, their posture and overall representation in the figure. Based on semiological analyses, in this
paper, it has been argued that Pāpak, a member of the famous clan of Qāren was “Bidaxš” and that vice-regent of Bahram II, Bahram
III, Nerseh and Hormizd II. Contrary to some scholars’ argument concerning the resemblance between the symbols of Bidaxš and those
of the Qāren clan, a close comparison shows a significant dissimilarity between the two. While the symbol of the clan of Qāren is a
blossoming bud on a horizontal line, the symbol of Bidaxš is a bud surrounded by two leaves. That is not portrayed on a horizontal
line. The relief of Hormizd II at Naqsh-e Rustam is perhaps the best example in this case, which clearly demonstrates the difference
between the two symbols. At Naqsh-e Rustam, both symbols are depicted on the helmet of Hormizd II’s defeated enemy. The nobility
of “Bidaxš Pāpak,” therefore, refutes the stereotype idea among some scholars who argue that the rank of Bidaxš was only restricted
to the royal family.

Keywords: Sassanid dynasty, Bidaxš, Pāpak, The clan of Qāren, Semiology

Introduction
“Bidaxš” was one of the most prominent titles of the
Sassanian period, used in vernacular language until
ca. 800 CE, some two centuries after the fall of the
Sassanian Empire. In Armenian language, historians like
“Agathangelos” and “Fastus” referred to it as “bdeašx.” In
Georgian language, the word is written in diverse forms
such as “pythš,” “bthš,” “pitiāxē,” “bthšy,” and “byty'hš.”
In Latin references of the fourth century CE, the word is
referred to as “Vitaxa” (for all see: Sundermann 1990:
242-3). Based on the first letter "p-" in the word, some
etymologists believed that “bidaxš” means “the king/
powerful” or perhaps “the eye of the king.” Other scholars
who identify "b-" as the first letter of the word, suppose
that “bidaxš” means “the second king” or “the vice-
regent” (Sundermann 1990: 243-4). Considering this titles
in third century CE inscriptions, it seems more probable
that “bidaxš” stands for “vice-regent,” “chancellor,” or
“the Grand vizier (prime minister)” because it comes
immediately after the titles of “the king” and “the princes.”
According to Lukonin, the title of “bidaxš” is only used
under the Sassanians before the third century CE (Lukonin
1377 [1998]: 136). Armenian historians described “Mehr
Nerseh” as the grand-vizier of Yazdgerd II and the
“Hazārpat” of the Sassanian Persian Empire (Chamount
1973: 148). Moreover, in a letter to Armenians, Mehr Nerseh
introduced himself as the Grand-Vizier [=Vuzorgfarmzār]
of the Persian Empire (Chamount 1973: 148). Some
researchers assume that while “Hazārpat” was the title of the
Grand-Vizier (prime-minister) in early Sassanian period, it
was eventually replaced by another title “Vuzorgfarmzār”
in the late Sassanian period (Christensen 1368 [1989]:
170-172; Gignoux 1992: 424; Huar 1375 [1996]: 165). By
referring to “Kaˈba-ye Zartosht” inscription in which the
royal titles of Ardashir and Shapur I’s reign are mentioned,
we have shown that “Hazārpat” was a military title in the
early Sassanid period (Khorashadi and Mousavi Kouhpar,
in press). Therefore, it is not conceivable that “Hazārpat”
and “the Grand-Vizier” were synonymous. By appealing to
inscriptions as well as historical narratives about the duties
and power of “Vuzorgfarmzār,” some researchers argue
that “Vuzorgfarmzār” was an appellation of “Bidaxš” in
early Sassanian period. Some scholars believe that the
position of Bidaxš was always restricted to royal family
(Wiesehofer, 1377 [1998]: 232). Towards the end of
Bahram II’s reign, Pāpak – a member of the clan of Qāren
– was endowed with this position. After the death of king
Bahram II in 293 CE, Pāpak – who was the Bidaxš of
Irān – in association with Bahram III’s supreme general
(= “Generalissimo” or Commander-in-chief) helped
Nerseh to grab the crown. During Nerseh’s fragile reign,
Pāpak reinforced his situation more than before. However,
the situation was changed once again in 302 CE when
Sorour Khorashadi
Department of Archaeology
Tarbiat Modares University
Sorur_khorashadi@yahoo.com

107
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer- Autumn 2015

Fig. 1. The relic attributed to Bidaxš (after Harper 1981: 202).

Fig. 2. The rock relief of Bahram II at Naqsh-e Rustam.

108
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer-Autumn 2015 International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists

Fig. 3. The image attributed to Bidaxš in the rock relief of Bahram II at Naqsh-e Rustam.

Fig. 4. The rock relief of Bahram II at Sarāb-e Bahram. (after Hinz 1385 Fig. 5. The image of Bidaxš Pāpak at Sarāb-e Bahram (after Hinz 1385
[2006]: 276). [2006]: 281).

109
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
Fig. 6. The relief of Hormizd II at Naqsh-e Rustam (after Hinz 1385 [2006]: 285).
Hormizd II, Nerseh’s son, became the king. Hormizd II,
could not tolerate Pāpak’s power and violently removed
him from his position. The king thereafter ordered the
artists to depict this historical event in a relief at Naqsh-e
Rustam (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 267-273). We are attempting
here to evaluate the identity of “Bidaxš Pāpak” through
semiological analysis.
Relics attributed to “Bidaxš Pāpak”
In search of archaeological evidence associated with
Bidaxš Pāpak, there is a relic discovered in the grave of
a Georgian princess near Tiflis (Tbilisi), Georgia (Hinz
1385 [2006]: 265). On the inner surface of the relic, there
are a number of decorative concave discs. At the center of
the inner surface, one can see the profile of a man’s bust
looking towards his right, surrounded by flat leaves rolling
together (Fig. 1). The man wears a large hat adorned
with designs that are closely reminiscent of the leaves of
laurus nobilis (Laurel tree). The edge of the man’s hat is
oriented toward its front and covers parts of his hair. He
also wears a headband. His hair is twisted in dreadlock that
hang down behind his neck. His long beard hangs down
his chin. He wears a pearl necklace. He has a bud in his
right hand holding it close to his nose. The symbol of the
“star and the crescent” indicates his position as the “Satrap
of Georgia” (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 265). This man appears
to be the same person as the last individual standing at the
right corner in the relief of Bahram II at Naqsh-e Rustam
110
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer- Autumn 2015
(Figs. 2-3). Probably he became the Bidaxš of Persia in 292
CE and simultaneously maintained his previous position
as the Satrap of Georgia. We can see a bud on his hat on
the relief of Bahram II at Sarāb-e Bahram (Fig. 3). Hinz
speculates that this man is “Pāpak” and the reason why his
symbol is changed is because of his promotion to the rank
of “Bidaxš.” The bud he holds on this relic (Fig. 1) is meant
to demonstrate his success. Hinz continues that the relic is
possibly a gift from the king to Pāpak (Hinz 1385 [2006]:
267-8). Lukonin too assigns this relic to Pāpak (Lukonin
1384 [2005]: 232; Harper 1981: 29-30).
The relief of Bahram II at Naqsh-e Rustam
This relief portrays Bahram II (the man with crown) and
his retinue (Fig. 2). In this relief one can see three men
standing behind the king to his right. All of them raise their
arms as a sign of respect. Styles of their hair, beards and
hats, on the one hand, and their presence next to the king
and the royal family, on the other hand, indicate their high
ranks in the royal court.
By referring to the symbol on the last man’s hat,
Lukonin hypothesized that he is “Bidaxš Pāpak” (Lukonin
1384 [2005]: 296). However, there is strong evidence
against this hypothesis. The hierarchical ranks of people
in Sassanian times were displayed in rock reliefs by the
order of characters’ positions. Therefore, Sassanian artists
meticulously demonstrated this hierarchical order in their
works. That is why Lukonin’s opinion seems unlikely,
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer-Autumn 2015 International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists

Fig. 7. The Fig of Bidaxš Pāpak in the rock relief of Hormizd II at Naqsh-e Rustam.

Fig. 8. A profile of Ardashir I rock relief at Firuzabad. Ardashir’s bodyguard is strangling a Parthian warrior (Notice the symbol of bud on his horse
saddle). (after Hinz 1385 [2006]: 166).

111
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer- Autumn 2015

Fig. 9. The rock relief of “Ardashir I” at Naqsh-e Rustam. (after Hinz, 1385 [2006]: 177).

Fig. 10. A profile of Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rustam (The courtier who hold a flyswatter) (after Hinz, 1385 [2006]: 182).

112
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer-Autumn 2015
Fig. 11. The rock relief of Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rajab.
because it necessitates that the last man standing behind
the king must have been Bidaxš, the vice-regent of the
Sasanian dynasty.
Hinz believes that the first individual standing behind
the king is a young man whose beard has not yet grown.
Although he does not farther his argument, he proposes
that the young man must be Bidaxš (Hinz 1385 [2006]:
284) (Fig. 3). In line with Lukonin, Hinz identifies the last
man as Pāpak, yet in contradiction to Lukonin, he believes
that Pāpak is not depicted as Bidaxš in this particular relief,
rather he is portrayed as the Satrap of Georgia, since his
symbol is the “star and the crescent,” not a “blossoming
bud.”
Regarding the long queue of the noblemen to the left
of the king in this relief, we may be able to recognize
“Bidaxš” among them. If we evaluate the characters’ rank
to each other as a factor influenced by their significance in
Sassanian state, then we should admit that Bidaxš is the
first person on the left hand side of the king. Apart from his
youth and beardless face, his hat is to some extent similar
to that of Bidaxš in other reliefs as his hat has a curve on
its top. This feature can also be seen in the hat of Bidaxš in
other reliefs. The young man’s long unadorned hat covers
his ears in the way the Median hats did. The rest of young
man’s hat is portrayed differently in comparison to hats
of other noblemen. With respect to the fact that, unlike
the young man, the second and third men wear decorated
113
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
hats, it is irrational to state that the young man is the vice-
regent of the dynasty, since he could not have possibly be
depicted with a hat without any decorations. In general,
his appearance is in contradiction with his position and
priority in the relief. Thus recognizing him as Bidaxš is
skeptical and his identity remains ambivalent.
The relief of Bahram II at Sarāb-e Bahram
This relief is located 35 km north of Bishapur, on the way
from Kazerun to Fahliyān. Engelbert Kaempfer was the
first European who visited the site in 1685 (Hinz 1385
[2006]: 265). The relief shows a frontal image of the king
sitting on his throne. He has put both his hands on the sheath
held between his legs. On each side of his crown, there
is an eagle wing. This crown represents the deity [Yazat]
of triumph “VaraƟrağna.” Above the crown, there is large
globe with two rising ribbons. The king is accompanied by
two courtiers on either side, both of whom bend their fore
fingers as a sign of respect (Fig. 4).
Hinz asserts that Bidaxš is the most powerful man
after Kartir (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 266). By referring to the
“Pāikuli” inscription, Hinz argues that the title of “Bidaxš”
belonged to Pāpak at the end of Bahram II’s reign (Hinz
1385 [2006]: 267). On this basis, Hinz identifies the man
standing on the right hand side of the king as “Bidaxš
Pāpak” (Hinz, 1385 [2006]: 267). Hinz farther argues that
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
Fig. 12. A profile of Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rajab. Ardashir’s courtier is
observable (after Hinz 1385 [2006]: 173).
Pāpak was the grandson of “Ardashir” who himself held
the position of “Bidaxš” during Ardashir I’s reign (Hinz
1385 [2006]: 267). On the relief of Bahram II at Naqsh-e
Rustam, Pāpak is depicted with the symbol of “star and
crescent.” On the relief of Bahram II at “Sarāb-e Bahram,”
however, he is demarcated with a bud (Hinz 1385 [2006]:
267) (Fig. 5). Hinz explains this matter as follows: the
Armazian relic (above) is an indication that Pāpak, the
Satrap of Georgia in that time became the Bidaxš of the
Sassanian Empire. If so, we are able to interpret how the
symbol on his headband was modified after his promotion.
Based on this hypothetical reconstruction of events, we
shall pronounce that he is symbolically holding a bud as a
sign of his promotion. The fact that he holds the bud above,
rather before his nose supports this argument (Hinz 1385
[2006]: 267-8).
Based on the second man’s symbol, Lukonin identifies
him as a member of the clan of Qāren (Lukonin 1384
[2005]: 318). Aspects of Lukonin’s argument, however,
seem problematic. Although he accurately endorses Hinz’s
hypothesis concerning Pāpak's association with the clan of
Qāren, he erroneously equates the symbols of the clan of
Qāren (the blossoming bud on a horizontal line) with that
of Bidaxš (a bud surrounded by two leaves).
The relief of Hormizd II at Naqsh-e Rustam
It seems that this relief is highly influenced by that of
Ardashir at Firuzabad. The prince is depicted in a way that
he seems to be defeating his enemy while riding a horse.
There is a significant similarity between the two reliefs at
Naqsh-e Rustam and Firuzabad (Ghirshman 1370 [1991]:
114
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer- Autumn 2015
Fig. 13. The silver cup of Krasna Polyana (after Hinz 1385 [2006]:
284).
179) (Fig. 6). The prince, in Walther Hinz’s opinion, is
no one but Hormizd II. Hinz argues that the prince in the
Naqsh-e Rustam relief is attacking his enemy while holding
a long spear. The armored defeated enemy is wearing
a helmet on the right side of which there is a particular
symbol (Fig. 7). This symbol can also be seen in two other
places: 1) On the horse saddle of the last man in Ardashir’s
battle scene with the Parthians; 2) On the headband of
Ardashir’s servant, the former on the Firuzabad relief (Fig.
8) and the latter both at Naqsh-e Rustam (Figs. 9-10) and
Naqsh-e Rajab reliefs (Figs. 11-12). What can this special
symbol be? A blossoming bud on a horizontal line must
identify a particular clan (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 169).
Lukonin asserts that this is the specific symbol of the
clan of Qāren (Lukonin 1384 [2005]: 305, 307, 309,
322). There are other buds on the headband of Hormizd
II’s enemy which, according to Hinz (1385 [2006]: 273),
resemble the symbol of bear-hunter in Krasna Polyana cup.
According to Hinz (1385 [2006]: 273) the link between
these two symbols is the silver Armazia relic. Thus he
deduces that the image of nobleman in Krasna Polyana
cup is that of Bidaxš Pāpak. The silver cup of Krasna
Polyana – discovered in Abkhazia in 1947– depicts a
Sassanian nobleman hunting (Fig. 13). This hunter’s hat is,
according to Hinz, the same as that of Pāpak at the Naqsh-e
Rostam relief. The hat’s rim is decorated with leaves of
laurus nobilis. It has two short ribbons stretching along
the character’s neck. The only dissimilarity between the
hats is their signs. While the former has a sign of “stars
and crescent,” the latter has buds. This dissimilarity
would be explainable if we admit that the hunter is Pāpak
before receiving his promotion (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 268).
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer-Autumn 2015
Fig. 15. A seal ascribed to Bafarag- the Mobad of Mishan (after
Ackerman 1387 [2008]: 980).
Contradicting Hinz’s hypothesis, Lukonin argues that the
hunter can be nobody but Bahram of Kermānshāh (Lukoni,
1384 [2005]: 206). There are two minor visual facts that
could refute Hinz’s opinion concerning the uniformity of
hats at Naqsh-e Rustam relief and Krasna Polyana relic:
first, the headband of the man on the relic is simple, while
the headband on the Naqsh-e Rustam relief has a pattern
of laurus nobilis. Second, the rims of the hats are different
such that the hat of the man at the Naqsh-e Rustam relief
has some horizontal lines, whereas the hat portrayed in
the relic has some ruby-like round pieces. Moreover, we
believe that there are at least three lines of evidence against
Hinz’s hypothesis:
1. The shape of the hat at the Naqsh-e Rustam relief
differs from both hats portrayed at Sarāb-e Bahram relief
and Armazia silver cup. After his promotion, Pāpak
appears to wear a hat that is curved in front. Therefore,
logically speaking, if the hats were the same, then the hat
of Bidaxš Pāpak on the Sarāb-e Bahram relief should have
been identical with his hat on the Krasna Polyana relic.
2. We cannot confirm with a high degree of certainty that
the symbol of “bud” on Krasna Polyana relic is identical
with the “bud” symbol of “Bidaxš” title. First of all,
although the bud of Krasna Polyana relic has three petals,
the bud of Bidaxš only has one. Secondly, it seems that the
buds of the Krasna Polyana relic are solely decorative and
cannot be considered an essential part of the character’s
identity.
3. Even if we disregard the aforementioned differences,
we should not overlook the existence of a sign in Krasna
115
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
Fig. 14. A seal ascribed to Shaki Mogh (after Ackerman 1387 [2008]: 980).
Polyana hat that seems to be a monogram. Such monograms
can frequently be seen on hats of Sassanian noblemen
(Figs. 14-15). Regarding their special shape as well as their
central position on the hats, these monograms represented
the ranks of their holders.
Based on these premises, the monogram of this
relic might stand for a particular clan or person. But it
obviously cannot signify Bidaxš Pāpak of the clan of
Qāren. As mentioned above, Bidaxš Pšpak was violently
relegated by Hormizd II. The king, thereafter, ordered
his artists to depict this historical event by carving a bold
battle at Naqsh-e Rustam (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 267-273).
Consequently, who could be Hormizd’s enemy except a
former powerful man in Sassanian court? Who could be
his enemy but Pāpak, a member of the clan of Qāren?
In the list of courtiers of Ardashir I and Shapur I in the
Ka'ba-ye Zartosht inscription, the clan of Qāren occupies
a prominent position. In Ardashir I’s relief at Firuzabad
(Fig. 9), Naqsh-e Rustam (Figs. 10-11) and Naqsh-e Rajab
(Figs. 12-13), one can clearly observe the faithfulness and
supportiveness of the clan of Qāren to Sassanian kings.
The symbol of Ardashir I’s bodyguard in these reliefs with
a blossoming bud on a horizontal line is fairly obvious.
As most researchers maintain, this sign is confined to the
clan of Qāren (Hinz 1385 [2006]:162-176; Lukonin 1384
[2005]: 307-309). According to Hinz, the bodyguard may
possibly be the Bidaxš of Ardashir in Ka'ba-ye Zartosht
inscription (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 276). Hinz refutes the
resemblance of Ardashir's bodyguard to Bidaxš by referring
to the symbol of the clan of Qāren. Instead he proposes
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
that there is a referential relation between the two (distinct)
symbols of “bud,” and therefore assumes that each refers to
the other. Hinz argues that the individual with the symbol
of the “bud” in Bahram II's relief must be the Bidaxš and
the grandson of Ardashir I's bodyguard; so he could have
also been the Bidaxš of Ardashir I who is mentioned in
Ka'ba-ye Zartosht inscription.
Once again, it is imperative to emphasize that the
symbol of “bud” does not necessarily refer to either Bidaxš
or the clan of Qāren. On the other hand, it seems strange
to picture a prestigious position like “Bidaxš” as a courtier
who holds a flyswatter, because it contradicts Sassanian
obsession with depicting major figures in accordance with
their hierarchical positions and responsibilities in the royal
court. Moreover, even if we accept Hinz’s hypothesis
concerning the identity of Ardashir's bodyguard and
Bidaxš, we cannot explain why he is portrayed before
the crown prince “Shapurz.” Although the bodyguard
is illustrated immediately after the king in Ardashir’s
relief, he could not be Bidaxš, because, according to the
inscriptions, the rank of Bidaxš was politically beneath
that of the king and royal princes. Therefore, Hinz’s
hypothesis is in contradiction with the Sassanian order of
illustration: to reflect one’s political rank in illustration
in terms of his priority in comparison to other characters.
Furthermore, Hinz’s hypothesis requires a questionable
assumption about the inheritance of the rank of Bidaxš
within one particular dynasty, namely the clan of Qāren.
However, we see no trace of even an implicit reference in
historical sources about the inheritance of such a position.
Logically speaking, thus, we could conservatively admit
that Ardashir’s bodyguard was only a member of the clan
of Qāren.
Historical sources contradict the relief of Hormizd II at
Naqsh-e Rustam. According to this relief, Bidaxš Pāpak
is the victim of a major battle with Hormizd II, whereas
according to historical sources, not only Bidaxš Pāpak was
not defeated by Hormizd II, but he (and the clan of Qāren)
enjoyed absolute and stable power even after Hormizd
II’s reign. Their impact can be easily seen until the fall
of Sassanid Empire. For example, one of the most well-
known characters in Sassanian period was a man named
“Zarmihr Sukhra.” He was a member of the court of Kavād
I and apparently related to the clan of Qāren (Christensen
1374 [1995]: 206; Mashkour 1343 [1964]: 422-428). We
suppose that we may be able to reconcile the discrepancy
between the historical sources and the Hormizd II’s relief
at Naqsh-e Rustam by appealing to the story of Bahrām
Chubin. The historical sources assert that Bahrām, despite
his sister Gorduyeh’s disagreement, rebelled against the
central Sassanian government. The consequence of his
rebellion was nothing but failure (Salehi 1388 [2009]: 68-
69). This failure, however, did not result in permanent
exclusion of the clan of Mehrān from controlling the
frontiers of the Empire (Bayani 1383 [2004]: 91). We may
116
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer- Autumn 2015
therefore interpret the whole event like this: in a particular
period of time in Sassanian period, there existed a division
in the clan of Qāren. One fraction, led by Pāpak, rebelled
against the central government and was repressed by
Hormizd II. If this postulation makes sense, then we should
only maintain that Hormizd II’s relief at Naqsh-e Rustam
represents a gloomy relation between the clan of Qāren and
the central government in a period of Sassanian period.
Conclusion
In creating memorial artwork, Sassanian artists were
realists. So we are able to identify Pāpak, the vice-regent
of Bahram II, Bahram III, Nerseh, and Hormizd II, in
Sassanian artworks by observing the shape of his personal
hat, special headband, styles of his hair and beard, attire,
special sign and his political importance other individuals
as reflected in their position, posture, and rank in the queue.
The sign of Hormizd II’s defeated enemy (observable on
the center of his helmet) at Naqsh-e Rustam relief appears
to be the same as the sign of Ardashir’s bodyguard at
Firuzabad, Naqsh-e Rustam and Naqsh-e Rajab. This
sign or symbol shows a blossoming bud on a horizontal
line. What this symbol shows is identical with the special
symbol of the clan of Qāren. Furthermore, we may notice
some buds on the headband of Ardashir's bodyguard. A
similar bud can also be observed in the hand of a man
portrayed in Armazian silver relic. Likewise, we can see
the same bud on the hat of the second man standing on
the right hand side hand of the king Bahram II at Sarāb-e
Bahram. Hinz believes that Armazian relic pertains to the
transitional period of time in which Pāpak, the Satrap of
Georgia at the time, was promoted and became the Bidaxš
of the Sassanian dynasty (Hinz 1385 [2006]: 267). If so,
we must accept Hinz’s conjecture that the “Armazian relic
man” is not only Bidaxš of Persia, but also a member of
the famous “clan of Qāren.” This means that the position
of “Bidaxš” was not confined to the royal family at all.
The similarities between the symbols of the clan of Qāren
and the position of Bidaxš misled many researchers in
identifying the characters in Sassanian artworks. For
instance, some scholars (e.g., Lukonin 1384 [2005]: 318)
erroneously attributed the symbol of Bidaxš to the clan
of Qāren in the time of Bahram II. In a same way, other
scholars (e.g., Hinz 1385 [2006]: 268) accurately ascribed
the ornamental buds (portrayed on the hat of individual
on the Krasna Polyana cup) to Bidaxš Pāpak. Close
examination of the “bud” symbols indicates a significant
difference between the symbol of the clan of Qāren and
that of the position of Bidaxš. The symbol of the clan of
Qāren is a bud blossoming on a horizontal line, while the
symbol of Bidaxš is a bud surrounded by two leaves and
lacks a horizontal line. The relief of Hormizd II at Naqsh-e
Rustam too highlights the differences since both symbols
are depicted on the helmet of Hormizd II's enemy. If the
Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer-Autumn 2015
symbols of the clan of Qāren and Bidaxš were identical,
then there would have been no reason for the artists to
depict both symbols separately. Thus the distinct depiction
of both symbols on a helmet was an artistic device to
emphasize a substantial functional difference between the
two “bud” symbols.
References
Ackerman, P.,
1387 [2008] Sasanian Seals. In: Pope, A. U and Ackerman,
P. (Eds.), Survey of Persian Art from Prehistoric Times to the Present.
Vol. II, Translated into Persian by Naser Norouzzadeh-ey Chegini. Elmi-
Farhangi Publications, Tehran, pp. 977-1012.
Bayani, S.,
1383 [2004] The Fall of Parthians and the Rise of Sasanians.
Tehran University Publications, Tehran.
Chaumont, M. L.,
1973 Chiliarque et Curopalate a la Cour des Sassanides. Irānica
Antiqua 10, 139-165.
Christensen, A. E.,
1368 [1989] Irān during Sassanian Period. Translated into
Persian by Rashid Yasemi. Book World Publications, Tehran.
1374 [1995] The State of the Nation, Government and Court
in Sasanian Period. Translated into Persian by Mojtaba Minoovi. The
Institution of the Social Sciences and Cultural Readings, Tehran.
Ghirshman, R.,
1370 [1991] The Art of Ancient Irān: The Art of Parthian and
Sasanians. Translated into Persian by Bahram Farahvashi. The Institution
of Translation & Publication, Tehran.
Gignoux, P.,
1992 Chiliarch. Encyclopaedia Irānica V, 423-4.
117
International Journal of the Society of Iranian Archaeologists
Harper, P. O.,
1981 Silver Vessels of the Sasanian Period. Vol I: Royal Imagery.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Hinz, W.,
1385 [2006] New Finds from Ancient Irān. Translated into
Persian by Parviz Rajabi. Qoqnoos Publications, Tehran.
Houar, K.,
1375[1996] Irān and Iranian Civilization. Translated into
Persian by Hasan Anoosheh. Amir Kabir Publications, Tehran.
Khorashadi, S and M. Mousavi Kouhpar,
In Press Identification of Sassanid Commander in Rock
Relief of Darabgerd.
Lukonin, V. G.,
1377 [1998] Political, Social and Administrative Institutions,
Taxes and Trade. In: Yarshater, E. (Ed.), The Cambridge History of Irān.
Vol III: Parthian and Sasanian Period. Translated into Persian by Hasan
Anoosheh. Amir Kabir Publications, Tehra, pp. 71-148.
1384 [2005] Persian Civilization under the Sasanians.
Translated into Persian by Enayat-Allah Reza. Elmi-Farhangi
Publications, Tehran.
Mashkour, M. J.,
1343 [1964] Irān in Ancient Times. Vol I: In Pre-Islamic History
of the Nations and Kings. Teacher Training and Educational Research
Organization Publications, Tehran.
Salehi, K.,
1388 [2009] Towards Downfall. Irān-e Azad Publications,
Mashhad.
Sundermann, W.,
1990 Bidaxš. Encyclopaedia Irānica IV, 242-4.
Wiesehofer, J.,
1377 [1998] Ancient Persia (From 550 B.C to 650 A.D).
Translated into Persian by Morteza Saghebfar. Qoqnoos Publications,
Tehran.