href="#ulink_e34c7ccd-9133-53f9-80c3-f584bd557e72">Figure 23.2 General plan of Koktepe/Gava (Sogdiana). Koktepe II (last pre‐Achaemenid period): A and B) large monuments (A: sanctuary; A2: altar?). Koktepe III (Achaemenid period): C: central sacred platform; D: southeastern platform. Koktepe IV (early Hellenistic period); E: fortification; F: barracks.
Mirroring the best explored Achaemenid cities to the south of the Oxus (Altyn 10 in Bactria with its close parallel of Dahan‐i Ghulaman in Seistan), the site of Koktepe provides an example of long‐term urban development of the northern areas, in both agricultural and nomadic contexts (Rapin and Isamiddinov 2013).
Since the artifacts do not usually provide easy benchmarks in absolute chronology, the analysis relies on the stratigraphy, mainly on the changes which affected monumental architecture of fortifications, palaces, and sanctuaries during the successive political transitions. Established on a natural plateau near the Bulungur canal to the north of Samarkand, the earliest urban settlement of Koktepe appeared in the Yaz I agricultural context. It is not clear whether the city was fortified like the similar sites of Chust and Dalverzin‐tepe in Ferghana, but its regional importance was enhanced by the presence of apparently “official” monuments and a dense habitat. After it was abandoned, the site was devoted to pastoral activities for a couple of centuries.
Before the Achaemenids, Koktepe (Koktepe II period) appears as the major settlement of the Zeravshan, probably under the name of Gava, one of the cities mentioned in the early Avestan geography. Two large fortified courtyards appear on the plateau, one of religious function and the other, later complemented by a row of large rooms, grouping probably political, administrative, and economic functions. These buildings sheltered the primitive institutions of a “proto‐urban” organization in the context of a regional power which probably emanated from the sedentarization of the Scythians and evolved into a first stage of the Sogdian state. A thick fortification several kilometers long around the plateau must probably be attributed to this period (rather than to the Achaemenids who later, probably under Darius I, fortified Afrasiab itself on a length of more than 5.5 km). It is not excluded that the other oases followed a parallel process, for instance in the Kashka‐darya (ancient Kiš) and along the Kopet Dagh (fortification program of El’ken‐depe III, “Median” architecture of Ulug‐depe I: Lecomte 2013).
From an archeological point of view, the transition toward the Achaemenids is rarely attested. Some sites are then abandoned (for example, Ulug‐depe). At Koktepe the transition occurred apparently through a drastic change of architectural patterns marked by the erection of two platform buildings, the southeastern one having been built a little later than the central one (Koktepe III architectural phase). This renewal of the symbols of authority coincides probably with the takeover of the region by Cyrus and Darius I. At the end of the Achaemenid period, however, Koktepe was no more than a regional fortress (known by the historian Arrian under the name of Gabae), while Afrasiab‐Maracanda had reached the primacy between Zeravshan (the ancient Zariaspes/Polytimetus) and the Dargom canal (Dargomanes of Claudius Ptolemy).
The life of the main cities was partially interrupted during the first decades of the Macedonian power. Afrasiab and Koktepe are among the rare sites which present continuity as regards the location between the Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods, since several cities were rebuilt on adjacent sites during the Seleucid era.
Palaces
By its architecture, Koktepe represents one of the models of the proto‐urban development of the Central Asian cities. In contrast to the domestic architecture, the large monuments can be dated more easily since their construction can be linked to the historical transitions during which new authorities – like either the central Achaemenid power or the local satraps and hyparchs – intended to settle their power by launching new architectural programs.
Although it is difficult to seize links with the West, the Achaemenids do not seem to have imposed a strong cultural unity. Some architectural features of the independent quadrangular buildings formed around open courtyards evidenced at Altyn 10 and Dahan‐i Ghulaman seem to derive from traditions of the heart of empire (Persepolis, Pasargadae), but important monuments like the ones of Koktepe derive perhaps from a local or nomadic tradition. With the exception of some corridors, the satrapal palace on the citadel of Afrasiab (where Alexander murdered Clitus in 328 BCE) has not been explored enough for the identification of its main lines.
The origin of the schemes can be defined through the study of the much later Parthian royal complex of Old Nisa and Ai Khanum, two cities reflecting Greek, Bactrian, and Iranian (more than Mesopotamian) trends. While they are not systematically parallel to the general orientation of the sites, the buildings of both cities are structured by a network of corridors which allows us to distinguish private from public circulation areas, ensuring the movements around or between the units representing the various functions (residential, political, administrative, economic). Although they evoke a Mesopotamian tradition (see the Nebuchadnezzar palace of Babylon and the Darius palace at Susa), the corridors seem to have been already present in the local tradition from the beginning of the Achaemenid period. Other schemes like the quadrangular buildings organized around a courtyard (see above) originated in the common – western and eastern – Iranian world. The structures comprising a central unit encircled by corridors and rows of rooms with an axial pronaos or a porch constitute a rather widespread scheme at Old Nisa and in Hellenistic and Kushan Bactria. In the western Iranian world some residences like the Ayadana of Susa are often unduly identified as temples for the confusing analogies with the “ateshgah” scheme of the much later Parthian and Sasanian periods.
In the northern periphery of the empire (Chorasmia and lower Syr‐darya), the Achaemenid trends developed much later, from the fourth or third century BCE, under the form of large fortified settlements and cities (Koj‐Krylgan‐kala, Kalaly‐gyr 1 and 2, Kjuzeli‐gyr, Kazakl’i‐yatkan/Akchakhan‐kala, Babish‐Mullah) (Minardi 2015).
The Platforms
The platforms supporting open or covered constructions cannot be grouped into a clear typology, especially as it is difficult to assess a possible western influence. Several examples reflect a clearly local origin since their foundation often goes back to the early Iron Age. The largest platforms – more than 15 ha – had the status of regional cities (Altyn‐Dilyar‐Tepe, plateau of Koktepe in Sogdiana), while the smaller ones corresponded to regional fortresses like Tillya‐tepe in Bactria. The fortress of Kuchuk‐tepe assumed possibly a religious function during the Achaemenid period (Francfort 2005).
Religious Life
Contrasting with the Bronze Age, at the end of the second millennium a fundamental change occurred in religious life with the abandonment of the burial practices by the sedentary societies. While the inhumation survived in the steppic societies (to the point that the study of their cultures relies almost entirely on their necropoles) and is represented by various mausoleums in the peripheral Chorasmia, the sedentary populations of Central Asia were devoted to new funerary rituals materialized by the absence of human remains, the corpses being exposed to open sky for emaciation. These changes coincide with the emergence of the Mazdaean and Zoroastrian religion during the early Iron Age.
Among the most ancient parts of the Avesta, the first chapter of the Vendidad, composed not long before the Achaemenids, refers to a geography whose scheme radiates in Central Asia across a territory which coincides with the area covered by the “Oxus” cultures of Yaz I and II. The center into which this geography converges is not political but religious, since it corresponds to the place of the Illumination of Zoroaster, in northeastern Afghanistan (Grenet 2005). Therefore, at the arrival of the Achaemenids the Central Asian area is already inserted into the heart of a large common religious sphera.
The religious architecture is concentrated on a rather small corpus of sanctuaries and temples, whose identification and dating are often doubtful. One of the older performances of a fire cult has been evidenced at Koktepe/Gava in a pre‐Achaemenid courtyard monument (period II), possibly in connection with an only